If you're really bored...

[h._p.]

I've put up a few pages on what I consider to be <a

href="http://www.datareign.co.uk/Photography/CameraPages/camera_index.html">classic

cameras </a><br>

<br>

I've no doubt people will disagree with my choices and comments but

that's life.<br>

<br>

:-)))

[connealy]

Very nice writing, illustrations and layout. Might be nice to have a few sample photos from each camera.

[peter_evans4]

<p>Interesting.</p><p>On the F-1:</p><ul><li>Your account of the rangefinders is wrong: (i) even putting aside the "7sZ", the last model was the 7s; and (ii) the VI-T didn't sell so well.</li><li>I don't think the view is 100%, though I'm not going to check.</li><li>You might mention the action finder. (I'm still on the look-out for a reasonably priced example.) As far as I know it was new and hasn't been copied.</li><li>You might also mention the so-called "F-1n" (the later sub-version of the earlier version); its name can confuse people.</li><li>Did Canon lose interest in the F-1, or did they simply replace it with the T-series cameras?</li><li>Since your young whippersnapper readers may be approaching this page from an EOS background, you might point out for their benefit that the lenses have completely different mounts.</li><li>How come your camera looks so new and the lens still has its sticker attached?</li></p>

[dan_fromm1]

Idiosyncratic as can be, but that's more interesting than bland conformity. Keep it up, add more cameras, even clunkers like (IMO) the Prakticamat. I learn more from folks who don't agree with me than from the ones who do.

 

Cheers,

 

Dan

[h._p.]

Thanks folks!

 

Peter,

 

The F1 definitely had 100% viewing, I had both models and once spent a wet afternoon checking it out! Good point about the 7S, I'll mention that. About the VIT not selling well, I've re-checked my references and I think you're probably right there too - I'll change that paragraph.

 

The Nikon F had an action finder from the mid-sixties and I've no personal experience of either one, so I haven't mentioned it.

 

I think the comment about Canon losing interest in the F1 is reasonably fair. They seem to have stopped advertising it quite early in the 'eighties, despite continuing to sell it for another ten years.

[roy_des_ruisseaux]

Very nice Harvey. I owned a few of them in my youth. Upon leaving the army in 1962 I got a Honeywell Pentax H3v which I assume is the same as the Sv. Later I got an H1a. Both stolen with a bunch of lenses in 1964 or 65. I sold my first pictures with those Pentax cameras, a great design. Replaced them with the Nikon F had at least 4 or five over the years perhaps more. Always had 3 at one time. Also when I was freelancing in the early 1970's I had a Leica M3 & M2. Liked the M2 better. Didn't have a Practicamat but did have a Pentacon (Contax D ) which I took with me in the Army and traded for the Pentax. Fond memories!

[gib]

enjoyed reading your pages....I have a S1a, bought used about two years ago, came with a 55 f2 lens, simple smooth camera.

[terry_scott]

I remember well Rank Audio Visual's "Just Hold a Pentax" campaign.

 

There was a large difference in price between the S1a and the Sv. In 1963 (when I bought my first S1a), the Sv with 55mm f/1.8 cost a few pence under 100 GB Pounds and the S1a with 55mm f/2 was a fraction under 73 GBP.

 

The two S1a that I have today (one black, one chrome) both possess the unmarked 1/1000sec speed.

[terry_scott]

Bit of Nikon F history. Back yonder, I had a Nikon F that had plastic tips to the wind lever and the self-timer arm. Judging by the serial number, it was one of the last made before the arrival of the F2. Haven't seen one like this since. Gave it to my daughter, when she was studying art+photography in college...

[pensacolaphoto]

Good stuff, Harvey. By the way, it is a well-known "secret" that the F1N can directly be used with automatic setting by simply putting the wheel on the camera on A and the lens on A. You cannot see which apertures the camera chooses, but you do get automation. Canon never admitted this fact.

[dave_moeller]

Using IE 6.0 with view|text size set to Medium at 1024x768 resolution, a number of the pages are a mess. The text gets lost behind the pictures lots of places...if you're going to wrap text around a picture don't make the picture take up 90% of the width of the column. It never works well.

 

The profiles (what I could read of them) were interesting.

[Sandeha Lynch]

Harvey, it's great. But I'm losing text under the edge of some images on the Pentax page.

[charles_stobbs3]

Interesting pages. Are you asking for nominations for future subjects?

[h._p.]

Sandeha,

 

Are you using Internet Explorer? I just looked at the page using IE 6.02 and it's not honouring the hspace or vspace commands. I'll need to look into this further. Thanks for drawing my attention to it.

[h._p.]

Quick update on Sandeha's problem. It looks like it's something not quite right about IE6 (now there's a surprise!)

 

Firefox, Safari and Opera all display the pages correctly. If anyone else has a browser that isn't doing so I'd be greatful if you'd let me know.

[h._p.]

or even gratefull!

 

:-)))

[Sandeha Lynch]

Yeah, I'd thought to mention that I use IE (6plus latest) - and then promptly forgot!

[summitar]

Very well done and I hope you will keep adding to it. You hit one of my cameras (original F-1) and came close with the Retina 1B to my Retinas Ia, IIa, IIIc, and IIIC. Classic cameras are asubject (like fly fishing) where it just about as much fun as reading about them as using them. The old mechanicals will live forever, if we help them along.

[david_f._stein]

Excellent writing, Harvey. Thumbs Up!

[mfophotos]

Thanks, Harvey -- enjoyable reading!

[peter_evans4]

<p>Fast work with the rewriting, Harvey! I hadn't heard of a Nikon action

finder but I take your word for it, as for the 100% view of the

F-1.</p><p>Now let's take a closer look at what you say about the

F-1.</p><p><em>...a new camera to compete with Nikon, the F1N.

Despite the similarity in names this was an all new

camera...</em></p><p>The similarity is more extraordinary than the

casual reader might realize, as the camera was even marked "F-1", sans

"N". (Your casual reader might misinfer that your second photo is of the

F-1n.)</p><p><em>...it was generally agreed that if you were to have

automation, setting the shutter speed and letting the camera choose

the aperture was the way to go...</em></p><p>Is this true? I'm so

ancient

that I remember those days, and I thought that it was the other way

around. (NB I'm also so ancient that my memory is

going.)</p><p><em>...by

the

time the F1N was released, the company had its eyes firmly fixed on the

future. That future was the Eos auto-focus range of

cameras...</em></p><p>Yes, but the T90 might be worth a mention.

Though it strikes me as enormous and hideous, it seems to be well

regarded. (For that matter, the F-1N costs more these days than the

F-1(n), at least in my part of the world.)</p><p><em>...as the lens

mount for the original Canonflex

cameras was incompatible with the later 'FL' series to which the F1

belonged...</em></p><p>Well, yes -- though you're overlooking the FL/FD

distinction.</p>