A Simple Solution . . .

Someone asked me, the other day, why I have so many cameras; I

replied by citing the various merits and failings of my different

cameras and lenses, and how they complement each other. Then they

asked how much it would cost to get a camera that would do everything

I want -- and I had no idea.

<P>

So, just out of curiousity, is there a camera that can replace the

following equipment, and how much does it cost:

<P>

Nikon FM-10 and EM<BR>

35-70mm f/3.5~4.8 <BR>

micro-Nikkor 55mm f/2.8<BR>

100mm f/2.8 Series E<BR>

80-200mm f/4.5<BR>

Spiratone 400mm f/6.3<P>

 

Voigtlander Bessa-R, Zorki-4<BR>

50mm f/2 Jupiter-8<BR>

35mm f/2.8 Jupiter-12<BR>

50mm f/3.5 Industar-22 collabsible<BR>

<P>

I use the FM-10 for situations where I need accuracy (I shoot slide

film with an incident meter) and the EM where I need speed

(autoexposure and motor winder). The EM is also good for long

exposures -- it's accurate out to at least a couple of minutes. The

downside is that it there's no manual exposure.

<P>

I use the Bessa-R / Zorki-4 for work in lower light (handholdable at

1/15th and easy to focus) and because I like the look of the lenses.

There are times that I don't want the harsh look of my Nikons -- the

Russian lenses I have aren't quite as good in terms of resolving

power, but they have great bokeh and I like the smoothness of

pictures taken with them. I use them when I want my pictures to have

a "look" to them.

<P>

I do a lot of different sorts of photography; it's mainly a hobby for

me, so I don't feel pressured to specialize. I like macrophotography

and photography with telephotos, so if I were to simplify to one

camera, it probably couldn't be a rangefinder -- but if it were an

SLR, I'd want it to have a bright viewfinder and a very quiet shutter.

<P>

So I guess I'm asking if there's an SLR with autoexposure and an

option for a motor drive, a bright, easy-to-focus screen, a quiet

shutter, and lenses that are sharp (I enlarge to 12x18 or so from

35mm) but with smooth out-of-focus areas. Ideally it would also be

reasonably small, and hopefully not outlandishly expensive. I'm open

to autofocus systems, but it's definitely not essential. Is it out

there?

minolta's dynax 9 and even the dynax 7 (=maxxum, sometimes) is quite famous about being quiet and having a very big, bright, easy-to-focus-with viewfinder. The fancy 135mm stf lens is said to be sharp *if you want him to*, and it's supposed to do "wonderful things" with the out-of-focus area. But i personally never have seen him "alive".

 

These *are* expensive - for me. But still not the contax category.

I'd never limit myself by restricting my tools. Especially not simply because someone asked me why I have so many, however well intentioned or harmless the question.

 

However I am seriously considering trading off my Olympus OM gear simply because it offers nothing over my Nikon SLRs other than diminutive size and weight. Having two 35mm SLR systems is a little difficult to defend.

 

But SLRs and rangefinders are entirely different creatures. Don't count on finding one camera that will satisfactorily fill the niche each occupies for you.

You do not have very much equipment, and it seems that each camera and each lens serves a practical purpose for you, so what is the problem? Maybe the person you refer to was either merely curious or envying your equipment.

<p>

If you had more than ten cameras and more than fifty lenses spread over three or more different film formats, then maybe you had a problem ;-)

<p>

Kristian Sørensen, are you saying that I have a problem?

Kristian said: "You do not have very much equipment, and it seems that each camera and each lens serves a practical purpose for you, so what is the problem? Maybe the person you refer to was either merely curious or envying your equipment."

 

I agree Andrew doesn't have all that much gear! No problem, Andrew; you can just explain there are solid reasons for an enthusiast to have more than one camera, as one might reasonably have more than one window to look out of and more than one pair of shoes!

 

"If you had more than ten cameras and more than fifty lenses spread over three or more different film formats, then maybe you had a problem ;-)"

 

Now, perhaps Immelda Marcos would agree that setting numbers to constitute a "problem" is a fallacy! While I'm able to count many more than 10 cameras in 5 film formats + digital, I must stock only 3 sizes of film, and there are many fewer than 50 lenses. Whew, that was close!

You can never have too many cameras. If you want a camera for a specific purpose, buy it. Used cameras can be great bargains, provided you check them carefully.

 

If you sell your equipment, you will regret it, possibly sooner than later.

 

Of my cameras, I have about a dozen favorites that I really like and use.

 

By the way, take a look at a used Nikon FE or FE2, which seems to offer everything that you would like: autoexposure, reasonably quiet, interchangeable focusing screens, etc. As you know, Nikon (and most Japanese) lenses are very sharp.

Can you imagine asking a painter why he has so many different brushes?

 

As long as you have a use for a camera and you find the occasion to enjoy its

use, then for an amateur, that seems like a good enough reason to keep the

camera. For a professional, with the need to justify capital costs, insurance,

need for financing other equipment, and post-processing costs against return

on investment, the decision might have other aspects, but not for a non-

professional.

 

So the answer to your questioner is probably no. Unless you think differently.

I have lots of cameras because a change of system always brings me out of a dry spell. Also, one manufacturer may not make all the lenses you want. I have Minolta bodies mostly to mount the 85mm Varisoft and the superb 24mm 2.8. I also use them when I want auto exposure or a super-bright finder. Having a Voigtlander Prominent lets me use the romantic 1.5 Nokton and the warm and sharp 35mm Skoparon. Nikon bodies give me choices in finders and screens and also access to the legendary 105mm 2.5 and the equally awesome 85mm 1.4 and 180mm 2.8. And the Nikons give me credibility with clients. Leica is the street-shooting and traveling camera; it mounts several lenses that give a unique look. Then there's a Rolleiflex for glamour work and landscapes; and a Speed Graphic 4x5 for shots in which texture is the point. When you have all these tools, you learn after a while which ones best serve which purposes. And when you aren't using them, you can just admire their varying designs and ingenuities.

How many screwdrivers do you have and how many do you need?

:) well,let me see...

<br>"I have" here(university labs) 12 normal flat screwdrivers, 12 miniature flat screwdrivers, 12 gigantic flat screwdrivers. Then, 12 normal star drivers and 12 miniature star drivers. We have metric and inch-size Allen ranges(or whatever the spelling is), lots of them. And so on.

<p>

A week ago I bought an old broken-diaphragm lens for 3 euro, to dismount it and look inside. I couldn't find the correct screwdriver for it.

Funny rejoinder, Csab'. I should have added at the end of my post: "All this equipment is especially useful to a camera nut."

Hmm. All I have are four Minolta manual focus bodies, eleven Minolta lenses (including not only the fabulous 24mm f/2.8, but also the magnificent Shift CA 35mm f/12.8 and MC Rokkor-X 58mm f/1.2), one Mamiya TLR, and three Mamiya lenses. Looks like I've got some catching up to do. :)

Christian, I don't want to play the role of tempter, but I've heard great things about the Minolta Rokkor 85mm 1.7.......