dennisgg Posted February 21, 2015 Share Posted February 21, 2015 <p>http://www.popphoto.com/gear/2014/06/arca-swiss-4x5-camera-used-ansel-adams-auction?dom=fb&src=SOC</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Kahn Posted February 21, 2015 Share Posted February 21, 2015 <p>Yeah, but wouldn't you like to be able to bid $100 on it, just to be able to say you did? ;-)</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Currie Posted February 21, 2015 Share Posted February 21, 2015 <p>About 30 years ago I went to a sale of a defunct photo school somewhere around Millerton, NY (also home of Aperture press) at which a number of interesting items were going fairly cheaply, among them several very big enlargers, one of which was touted as having been Ansel Adams's first enlarger. I was sorely tempted but owing to some domestic issues involving the bringing home of a big enlarger, even for 80 bucks, I let it slide. Of course I cannot also know whether the thing had ever belonged to Adams, but it's possible, and it was kind of a cool idea. I never needed to blow up a 4x5 negative, but I'd buy it now anyway.</p> <p> </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James G. Dainis Posted February 21, 2015 Share Posted February 21, 2015 I wish I could buy it then I could take just as great photos as He did. I wonder how much it would cost to convert it to digital? James G. Dainis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aplumpton Posted February 21, 2015 Share Posted February 21, 2015 <p>I believe that Mr. Adams would be the first to be amused at such collector nonsense. Better to buy one of his images than his camera, as the image has artistic value. The camera may be worth a few times more and perhaps up to five times its original selling price as a historical artifact for a museum, but beyond that is crazy. It does nothing when not in his hands. If in his lifetime he were to find another camera of better performance or more conducive to his approach he would have likely dropped this one in a snap. And he may well have. One should read his book The Camera to understand the utilitarian nature of equipment as he saw it. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Keefer Posted February 22, 2015 Share Posted February 22, 2015 <p>James, you can buy the same camera (or close model) as that for a lot less. I saw one on eBay <a href="http://www.ebay.com/itm/like/300936626362?lpid=82&chn=ps">here</a> asking $1300. And you can get a new Arca-Swiss with a film or digital back, I think they are 200 megapixel backs. <a href="http://www.largeformatphotography.info/ARCA.pdf">LINK</a></p> <p>Here is a video on the Arca-Swiss. <a href="https://vimeo.com/24366528">link</a></p> Cheers, Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJHingel Posted February 22, 2015 Share Posted February 22, 2015 <p>Why "own" it ? Hopefully it will be bought by a serious museum so that you can admire it the rest of your life in public. <br> If you want to "own" something like it follow the advice of Mark above.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johne37179 Posted February 22, 2015 Share Posted February 22, 2015 <p>I had the good fortune of spending a part of the summer of 1968 in Yosemite with Ansel Adams and Lillian. I remember this camera very well and as a result of Ansel's recommendation bought one just like it. I kept in touch with Ansel until his death, but hadn't realized that Lillian had died.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bebu_lamar Posted February 22, 2015 Share Posted February 22, 2015 <p>I am a fan of Ansel Adams photographs but his equipment to me is just the same as used equipment of same made and model and certainly worth less to me than new equipment. <br> If I pay the high price it's for Adams photography not his equipment. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charles_stobbs3 Posted February 22, 2015 Share Posted February 22, 2015 Maybe a pack of film of the same type he used would make us better photographers for a lot less money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wogears Posted February 22, 2015 Share Posted February 22, 2015 <p>Back in the late Sixties, Ansel was 'on tour' selling prints. His price was $125 for an 11x14 of "Moonrise". I scrimped and saved, and was ready to buy, when he decided to raise his price to $250.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hjoseph7 Posted February 22, 2015 Share Posted February 22, 2015 <p>Looks a lot like my Cambo camera that I purchased on eBay for about $150.00 minus the lenses.<br> <a href="http://www.ebay.com/itm/CAMBO-4x5-Large-Format-View-Camera-/111603556525">http://www.ebay.com/itm/CAMBO-4x5-Large-Format-View-Camera-/111603556525</a></p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Smith Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 <p>I think that owning a camera with known provenance of belonging to Adams would be interesting, just as owning a Cartier-Bresson Leica would be nice. it would be better to be in a museum, but I don't really believe all those who poo-poo the whole idea. Like it or loath it they are legends and so their cameras are therefore not uninteresting.</p> Robin Smith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Currie Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 <p>I was thinking the same thing as Robin. I don't really crave owing some famous person'equipment, but imagine if someone here said, "oh yeah, I had Cartier Bresson's Leica, but the shutter stuck so I put it in a Goodwill bin."</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now