Is it a classic camera?

[minhnguyen9113]

<p> I got a Cosina 107-SW last year and found out that model and her sister the Voigtlander Bessa L were introduced in 1999 sold in the beginning of 2000s and discontinued in 2003. These cameras use LTM 39mm lens<br>

Are they classic cameras of the 21st century or they are no classic at all ?</p>

[david_carroll4]

<p>At the risk of opening up this discussion again - I had never heard of the 107-SW or the Bessa L before now, but, given that it uses 39mm screwmount lenses, is all mechanical, and it looks GREAT, it's definitely in the "classic" mould. That being said, is it "A Classic"? Not so sure - given that it merely recreates that styling of older cameras, albeit with modern mechanicals, I'm not sure that we'll be looking back in years to come, talking about how the Bessa L influenced photography, like, say, a Leica M, or a Nikon F. Still, it is a smashing looking little camera.</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>In general, unfortunately not always, but generally, this has been a very loose forum. At various times, we have been assured by the moderators that they will tolerate a considerable leeway in considering what a "classic" is, and that is as it should be. Originally there were date limits here (explaining some otherwise inexplicable arguments in early archived materials). Now it's just "classic manual cameras".<br>

I personally have no problem with Minh's cameras being discussed here.</p>

<p>The true orphans are the original autofocus cameras like the Maxxum and the early EOS cameras like the 650 (the first). Even the latter don't fit very comfortably into the EOS forum, and where would one discuss the former? These are 1985-6 cameras, so they are quickly approaching "classic" status if they were automobiles.<br>

They are film cameras, but otherwise the precursors of the modern digital cameras and are historically important. They are often inexpensive to acquire, and I have several of these--they all work just as well as when they were new.<br>

I honestly don't know if there is enough interest in these to support a forum of "modern automatic film cameras" or not.</p>

[minhnguyen9113]

<p> Here are couple pictures of my Cosina 107-SW. What do you think?<br>

<img src="http://i29.tinypic.com/331m007.jpg" alt="" /><br>

<img src="http://i31.tinypic.com/2iifpmu.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p> It does look classic, doesn't it?</p>

[marc_rochkind]

As I understand the rules of the forum, they are:

 

1. Classic camera has a fairly rigorous definition, and anything that doesn't meet that definition is outside the scope of the forum.

 

2. It's perfectly OK to discuss matters that are outside the scope of the forum, but

 

3. For matters outside the scope, there has to be some connection to the strict definition, no matter how tenuous, and

 

4. When we're not discussing cameras, we sometimes discuss the scope of the forum, which discussion is always within the scope of the forum.

 

Therefore, such a recent camera is (1) outside the scope of the forum, and (2) perfectly proper to discuss in the forum.

 

--Marc

[richterjw]

<p>Minh, what kind of convertor is that? I might be interested in on of these, suddenly. JR</p>

[fred_c1]

<p>It's just the domestic (Japanese) market version of the Bessa L. SW stands for super-wide (and their independence from precise focussing.)</p>

<p>Classic or not, there is already a forum dedicated to such cameras -- the Leica and RF forum. (No need for psuedo-legalese here.)</p>

[paul_wheatland]

<p>I have the Bessa L in black version of your camera. I also have a converter made in Germany that allows Nikkor lenses 35mm and wider to mount on L39 cameras. Depth of field and hyperfocal settings seem to take care of the "will it focus to infinity" and "is it cam coupled" questions. My only objections to this arrangement is the use of SLR lenses is much bulkier than tiny dedicated lenses (non retro focus design) and the need for various slide on finders. I pretty much have dedicated the 15mm Heliar with it's finder to this camera. By the way shooting even at f4.5 on the 15mm produces great photos even at 1/8 second hand held!! </p>

[Rob_the_waste]

<p>It looks pretty classic to me. Ask Gene.</p>

[JDMvW]

<blockquote>

<p>Classic or not, there is already a forum dedicated to such cameras -- the Leica and RF forum</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yeah, but those guys are 1) so <em>mean</em> and 2) often scornful of non-Leica curs and such. It's so much more <em>friendly</em> here at Classic Manual Cameras... ;)</p>

[minhnguyen9113]

<p> Rob, it looks pretty classic.</p>

<p> Paul, this one does not have a coupling cam.</p>

<p>Fred, thanks now I know SW stands for super-wide</p>

<p>Jeremy, that is a Canon mount converter B</p>

<p>Mark, I try this camera and the red and green LED in the back work the same way like Nikon FM</p>

<p>Thanks JDM and Davis</p>

<p>Thanks everyone</p>

[jean_moxhet]

<p>The Bessa L and T (quite similar but with lens coupled telemeter) are not trully classic cameras. But they are perfect and efficient tool to be used for shooting with classic lenses and with classic viewfinder.<br>

My "T aniversary model" is one of my favorites camera and she's nearly all the time in my bag fitted with 15 or 25mm lense and sometimes with a 90mm (winder vintage Voigtlander Turnit viewfinder).<br>

Enjoy your new camera!<br>

You can download manual from Butkus and don't forget to reward him.</p>

[k5083]

<p>JDM has it right. The boundaries here are usefully relaxed because there is no "Obsolete Cameras" forum to discuss the more recent detritus of photographic progress, whether manual or auto. Thus we frequently discuss cameras whose production runs slopped into the 21st century if they are members of systems/lens mounts/families associated with classic cameras, as yours surely is, because there is no other forum where the members really want to hear about them. Speaking just for myself, it's a pleasure hearing about your new toy. Like JDM, I'd like to have a place to talk about my early AF bodies -- mine are a Maxxum 5000 and a Yashica 230AF -- but feel that would be stretching this forum a bit far, so I will just wait until they are acknowledged as classics or an Obsolete forum is created.</p>

[richterjw]

<p>Anyone know where one of these can still be found, other than ebay? JR</p>

[zane1664879013]

<p>KEH.com usually has a few of the "new" Bessas at any given time. Selection and conditions vary, of course. Adorama and bhphoto also sell used goods.</p>

[minhnguyen9113]

<p>I bought this set seperate and combine together<br>

the body $100.00<br>

the lens $20.00 like new<br>

the converter $30.00 new<br>

the viewfinder from 35 to 135 ( Waltz ) $50.00<br>

all from Ebay</p>

[jim_leicafan]

<p>If Leica were to produce an exact replica of a IIIg scremount today, would it be considered a classic. I would have to say yes, and would buy one if the price wasn't astronomical.<br>

I wonder if there would be an appreciable market for such cameras as the Nikon F and Nikon rangefinders if they were remanufactured today.<br>

You can still buy modern replicas of the Colt "peacemaker".</p>

[User_502260]

<p>Once the 35/2.5 Canon FL lens got attached it became a classis. I get a kick out of the Bessa L because I have a bunch of Cosina-made SLRs. Five are Vivitars and two are Yashicas. The Vivitars cost between $15 and $25. They come with a glass prism, sensitive TTL metering, a top speed of 1/2000 and sometimes even a standard or zoom lens. I know that the L can be bought inexpensively now but without the prism or mirror and with minor modification to the shutter you would think the L would cost less than my Vivitars. I could get a finder for a particular lens and attach it to a Vivitar V4000S. Then I would just disregard the camera's viewfinder, estimate focus and shoot. If I'm doing that I might as well use one of my Rollei 35s. </p>

[dweezil]

<blockquote>

<p>If Leica were to produce an exact replica of a IIIg scremount today, would it be considered a classic. I would have to say yes, and would buy one if the price wasn't astronomical.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>You could count on three things:</p>

<ol>

<li>It would not only be considered a classic, it would be considered the eight wonder of the world and a solution for world peace</li>

<li>The cost price would be just shy of some medium large Third world country's annual defence budget, a bargain according to the leica crowd</li>

<li>While it would have obvious flaws and shortcomings, e.g: it would only be capable to use the original M39 lenses trough the use of an adapter, the leica crowd would maintain that this is a way better camera than the original or any other M39 camera and it would make the lenses somehow sharper and focussing correctly despites the adapter that looses infinity focus.</li>

</ol>

<p>Of course I write this with my oral appendix firmly pressed against the muscular tissue on the side of my face</p>

[johnw436]

<p>That is a beautiful looking camera, Minh. I didn't know there were affordable versions out there, but I have not spent a great deal looking. When Al Kaplan used to post he was doing a lot of work with a Bessa and a wide angle prime, if memory serves. I liked what he was doing a great deal.</p>

<p>Now you've made my Camera Buying Affliction act up...</p>

[minhnguyen9113]

<p>John<br>

I have not finish the film roll yet. But I check with ground glass on different lens from 28 to 200mm and they are pretty in focus.</p>