A classic for "anti-digital"

<p>An invitation to post images of your favorite classic that you consider to be the "ultimate anti-digital". The less dependent upon batteries and advanced technology the better, but remember, your answer is purely subjective. No real winner here, except for the readers of this thread, who get to hopefully see lots of pictures of cameras and some of the results.<br>

I will start with my favorite "anti-digital", my Rollei B35. It's pocketable, fairly light, and requires no battery. It meters via a built-in selenium cell which provides readings that one transfers to the shutter and aperture dial. Meter is still accurate.</p><div></div>

<p>A few results now. I used Fujicolor 200 which was developed and scanned to CD at CVS. I used the exposures recommended by the meter unless otherwise noted. Shutter range is limited compared to its CDS-equipped kin, though. Shutter is B, plus 1/30 to 1/500.</p><div></div>

<p>It's just as well that 1/30 is the slowest settable speed since selenium meters are not known for low light capability. For this picture I did not have enough light for 1/30 at f3.5 but since I had no tripod with me I just set that as my exposure and hoped for the best.</p><div></div>

<p>Another one with less than the necessary light. Same exposure as balcony chairs.</p><div></div>

<p>Last one. An outdoor shot at the exposure indicated by the meter (which, btw, is of the uncoupled variety).<br>

I look forward to seeing what everyone comes up with.</p><div></div>

<p>There is something nostalgic about film color rendering. Digital is amazing, but certain colors it just can't handle. The last picture, in particular, brings home that point. Overall color rendition may be a little flat, but the consistency is what is appealing, no over saturated reds, just good rendition.</p>

<p>I'm not anti-digital or really anti-anything photographic, but I know what you mean.</p>

<p>Although I don't use it that much anymore, my ultimate bare-bones manual camera would be a Graphic. Full manual everything, no meter except the handheld, no safety interlocks. If I don't pull the slide, I get a blank. If I don't wind the film, I get a double exposure.</p>

<p>This is my 1962 Century Graphic, which I bought secondhand in the 1980s. That's a very non-original Schneider Symmar-S 100/5.6, which I bought later. It's an excellent landscape lens. I have a few other lenses for it, but I'm a normal lens kind of guy, so that's the one I use most.</p>

<p><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/10464750-lg.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>This is a shot I took with the Graphic four years ago, on Vancouver Island. This was on XP2, exposed at 250. I probably used about f/16. The Symmar-S is a good sharp contrasty lens, but like all plasmats it performs best stopped down a bit. I had it on a lightweight tripod.<br /> <br /> <br /> <img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/17106272-lg.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>I totally reject the idea of "anti-digital". You don't have to 'hate' digital to love film cameras.<br>

So it's not surprising that one of my favorite film cameras is as close to digital you can have and still shoot film -- the EOS 3</p>

<p>Otherwise, I am imprinted on the Nikkormat EL.</p><div></div>

<p>Here is the EOS 3 at work</p><div></div>

<p>On the other hand, if it has to be all manual, here's your beau ideal.</p><div></div>

<p>I regularly shoot a Leica IIIc, often with an uncoated 50mm f3.5. It's my antidote to shooting my Nikon DSLR. I like softness.</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p><div></div>

<p>JDM, I don't totally reject digital. I resist using it when I feel a film camera is what I need (or want) for a particular situation. One use for them is when one wants to quickly post a photo of classic gear. I do take some freelance jobs and use digital since my clients want images right away. Nice-lookin' EOS 3, btw. I'm envious. I only have the Rebel K in EOS mount (except for my digital Rebel, of course.)</p>

<p>Anti-digital? I don't see how a camera can be anti-digital. Not electrified in any way, yes. Highly flexible, yes. Here are some shots about a part I made for a camera I just assembled. They show the camera too, without a film holder. The lens in the shots is a 35/4.5 Apo-Grandagon, current but about to be discontinued. <a href="https://skydrive.live.com/redir?resid=8D71BC33C77D1008%21309&authkey=%21AL4wujRLe4BDllM" target="_blank">https://skydrive.live.com/redir?resi...L4wujRLe4BDllM</a></p>

<p>The camera has a 4x5 back but I built it to shoot 6x12. The 6x12 roll holder isn't in any of the pictures. The camera will focus all but one of my lenses that cover the format, from 35 mm to 900 mm, to infinity on flat boards. It offers decentering movements with the 35, full movements (rise, shift, swing, tilt) with all of the others. Oh, yeah, the camera will also shoot 2x3.</p>

<p>The one lens I have that covers 6x12 and won't make infinity on it -- 60/14 Perigraphe front-mounted on a Ilex #3, the shutter is too thick -- will make infinity on my humble Century Graphic. </p>

<p>Don't look down on the humble Century Graphic. I applaud Dave Sims for showing his, envy his spiffy grip a little. </p>

<p>Years ago one of my friends had a Pentax 645, was delighted by the shots he got with it. Seeing 2x3 shots taken with my Century deflated him a little. 645 is half frame 2x3. 4x5 negs and trannies have much the same effect on me.</p>

<p>Pinstrocity. <a href="http://westfordcomp.com/classics/pinstrocity/index.html">CLICK.</a></p>

<p>Difficult choice, my nomination is my Kodak Medalist, first version, fully mechanical, it doesn't even have flash contacts. I did a post on it a while back. I must get around to respooling some film onto 620 spools and giving it another outing. It came with its ever ready case and two instruction books, one with civilian scenes, holidays etc, the other with military personnel, aircraft and other equipment, although the text is the same. And someone did ask me the inevitable question "Is it digital?" when they saw me using it.</p><div></div>

<p>OK here's one picture from the Medalist</p><div></div>

<p>John, you better send your Medalist in for repair as it seems to be front-focusing a tad bit. You here about this all the time with them new fangled AF lenses and cameras. If your focus is not where you want it with the Medalist it's your own damn fault. The Medalist is my "All time favorite" camera. Partly due to its history, but mostly due to it's picture taking quality. It's as good as my Rollei or Hasselblad. At least to me anyway. JohnW</p>

<p>Can't seem to find the memory card slot for some reason. Oh well.</p><div></div>

I too am a big fan of Graflex/Graphic and if I was better prepared would haul out my 1920s 2x3 Grafelx JR. But I've been thinking a lot about folders lately and have been windoshopping at the Bay, Certo6 too! On this theme is my everready pocketable Ikonta 520 w/ 75mm Tessar 645.<div></div>

Alt Stadt from across the Rhine<div></div>

An Easter Lily .. Tis the Season<div></div>

<p>Classic Manual ... not anti-digital!<br>

<a href=" </div>

<p>I'm not able to upload a picture yet, but my new favorite "anti-digital" (even though I regularly use a Leica M8, Nikon D300 and Nikon P7100) just arrived in the mail today. A mint/like new Nikon F2 Photomic in the box. I'm anxious to run some film through it after I get a lens for it. I also enjoy shooting a mint Nikon F5 and a very very clean Nikon EM. This damn hobby is a sickness. :)</p>

<p>This cameras sees regular use. Without a meter or any battery, I'd have to say it's pretty non-digital. The camera was made in 1966, the lens in 1972.</p>