1959: the year that the press cameras became dethroned, defunct, defunded

[Cholentpot]

I shall be moving into your basement where I will spend the rest of my days (or daze) for $50 per month. - David Lyga

Don't mind the boxes of cameras or the water coming up from the floor. This here is a century home, and what I can afford.

Gas . . . I bought a used all electric car to save about $4600 in gas bills commuting to work annually where they provide free charging!

Commute. Work.

What strange words are these? I recall doing something like that a long time ago. Now I sit in my soon-to-be-rented out basement wearing a mask and yelling at a screen.

 

[David Lyga]

Don't mind the boxes of cameras or the water coming up from the floor. This here is a century home, and what I can afford.



Commute. Work.

What strange words are these? I recall doing something like that a long time ago. Now I sit in my soon-to-be-rented out basement wearing a mask and yelling at a screen.

Do not be so naive in thinking that I will not grab this $50 'offer', water and all (but, hopefully, no waterBUGS)! - David Lyga

 

[Cholentpot]

Do not be so naive in thinking that I will not grab this $50 'offer', water and all (but, hopefully, no waterBUGS)! - David Lyga

Not insulated.

Also, my darkroom has not been built since I moved in. That may be a deal breaker.

 

[David Lyga]

Not insulated.

Also, my darkroom has not been built since I moved in. That may be a deal breaker.

If I can have a 'darkroom' in a 10 X 11 foot efficiency, I can have one there. If you do not offer this to me I will send Sean a note telling him to deal with you. - David Lyga

 

[Cholentpot]

If I can have a 'darkroom' in a 10 X 11 foot efficiency, I can have one there. If you do not offer this to me I will send Sean a note telling him to deal with you. - David Lyga

I have a root cellar with all my jams and preserves. Shawn will deal with your Sean.

 

[David Lyga]

Well, since I am a vegetarian, the jams and preserves will preserve me. But ... Shawn ... who is he?

 

[Cholentpot]

Well, since I am a vegetarian, the jams and preserves will preserve me. But ... Shawn ... who is he?

Lives in basement. Eats short-ends.

 

[wiltw]

That's nothing. I got a gallon of regular for less than .99 a few months ago...

You live in TX?

 

[AgX]

Back to the topic:

So we have not yet for sure established whether the replacement of the press camera in the USA went over the 35mm RF or was directly by the 35mm SLR.
Am I right?

 

[Dennis-B]

Back to the topic:

So we have not yet for sure established whether the replacement of the press camera in the USA went over the 35mm RF or was directly by the 35mm SLR.
Am I right?

A very complicated question -

The 4x5, along with the 3.25x4.25 "Baby Graphic" cameras devolved not only to 35mm, but in the interim, to the TLR, and some medium format cameras such as the Mamiya Universal, Koni Omega, and Graflex XL, and Linhof, among others. I can remember a few photographers from the Louisville Courier Journal carrying a few Leica M series in the 60's, mostly as a personal "back up" camera. I don't think that the 4x5 just up and died one day. Rather, a lot of photographers coming up who were Baby Boomers (i.e. born 1946 and later), weren't schooled as much on sheet film, as they were roll and 135 films. As the "old timers" retired, their replacements probably brought the roll film and 35mm cameras to the job. I did some stringer work for them in the mid-1970's (Nikkormat), and there wasn't a single 4x5 in the photo gear room. When I worked there in circulation in the mid-60's, there were shelves and lockers full of Speed Graphics and their associated parts. It didn't take long, but it was evolutionary.

There were efforts during the heyday of the 4x5. Busch made a 4x5 aluminum frame camera, as did Graflex with their Super and Super Speed models. However, it was akin to adding light-weight deck chairs to the QEII, while Boeing 707's flew overhead. "Alea Iacta Est", as Caesar was alleged to have stated when he crossed the Rubicon.

 

[brainmonster]

Convenience and portability often trump small image quality improvements. Not to mention 35mm is more more efficient and cost effective, and allows you to take many more pictures and choose the "best" ones. Just look how popular cell phone cameras have become and have trumped DSLRs in recent years. It's simply because of convenience and portability, that's it...

That being said I think press cameras are really cool for historical purposes. I'd love to have one at some point, I think they'd look really cool to use and feel really old timey - like what you'd see in movies, with press photographers with huge cameras photographing celebrities.

But for the average person and for functional purposes, ease of use and portability are king. Even the resurgence of rangefinder cameras in recent years and mirrorless vs. dslr reflect this trend.

 

[Cholentpot]

Convenience and portability often trump small image quality improvements. Not to mention 35mm is more more efficient and cost effective, and allows you to take many more pictures and choose the "best" ones. Just look how popular cell phone cameras have become and have trumped DSLRs in recent years. It's simply because of convenience and portability, that's it...

That being said I think press cameras are really cool for historical purposes. I'd love to have one at some point, I think they'd look really cool to use and feel really old timey - like what you'd see in movies, with press photographers with huge cameras photographing celebrities.

But for the average person and for functional purposes, ease of use and portability are king. Even the resurgence of rangefinder cameras in recent years and mirrorless vs. dslr reflect this trend.

I'd argue that where we are at with photography fun triumphs everything else. Cellphones can juuuust about do it all, but they're not very fun. A view camera is a lot of fun to use. I guess this is the departure from the ol' days of press pools and photojournalists.

 

[Cholentpot]

You live in TX?

OH.

 

[wiltw]

Back to the topic:

So we have not yet for sure established whether the replacement of the press camera in the USA went over the 35mm RF or was directly by the 35mm SLR.
Am I right?

Well, we know that a photographers for Life magazine were using Leica and Contax rangefinder cameras with Leitz and Zeiss glass, when he travelled to Japan in early 1950 and met up with another Life photographer, and THEY connected with someone in Japan who used Japanese lens. Curiousity aroused, THEY visited Nikon and engaged in a comparison of their Leitz and Zeiss lenses vs. Japanese optics, and the twophotographers for Life and Fortune left Japan owning Nikkor lenses fitted to their German rangefinder camera. The NY Times heard about their results in that same year, and this resulted in the 1950 article praising the Nikkor lenses...so the popularity of the Nikon rangefinder cameras got established may years before the introduction of the Nikon F in 1959. All of the events I related above are available for corroboration.

 

[Dennis-B]

Well, we know that a photographers for Life magazine were using Leica and Contax rangefinder cameras with Leitz and Zeiss glass, when he travelled to Japan in early 1950 and met up with another Life photographer, and THEY connected with someone in Japan who used Japanese lens. Curiousity aroused, THEY visited Nikon and engaged in a comparison of their Leitz and Zeiss lenses vs. Japanese optics, and the twophotographers for Life and Fortune left Japan owning Nikkor lenses fitted to their German rangefinder camera. The NY Times heard about their results in that same year, and this resulted in the 1950 article praising the Nikkor lenses...so the popularity of the Nikon rangefinder cameras got established may years before the introduction of the Nikon F in 1959. All of the events I related above are available for corroboration.

No doubt. I've read the stories myself.

Also, there were GI's, Marines, Sailors, and Airmen stationed in Japan with a lot of U.S. cash to be spent. And considering that Japan was a major R&R center for service folks in South Korea, there were lots of Nikons, etc., spent either in local shops, or in Exchanges (Navy and Post). I've seen some of the photos taken during occupied Japan with Japanese cameras, and they produced excellent photos. One of our "Lifer" Master Chiefs had huge albums of photos, and they were excellent, even 18 years after the photos were taken. A number of those Japanese cameras were taken back to Korea, and used in combat to capture some excellent footage and prints.

 

[AgX]

The question arises if that
"praising the Nikkor lenses...so the popularity of the Nikon rangefinder cameras got established"
actually made the US press photographers working within the USA change their practice yet, or was it the appearance of the Nikon F.

 

[Disappointed_Horse]

A lot of that arrogance has to do with ignorance. People in Europe tend to travel much more to other countries than people in the United States so they are more aware. It's easy to think that everything is better here, but when you actually go other places you find out that you are wrong. Some things are better done here and some things are better done somewhere else. Some, it's just a matter of opinion.

There is a reason that we only get two weeks of vacation a year in this country, and it isn't that old Protestant work ethic…

Very interesting thread and tangential posts!

 

[David Lyga]

The question arises if that
"praising the Nikkor lenses...so the popularity of the Nikon rangefinder cameras got established"
actually made the US press photographers working within the USA change their practice yet, or was it the appearance of the Nikon F.

The answer to this question is frustratingly confusing because of all the inherent loyalties which were at work. The press was not a monolith. As said previously, the last holdout for press cameras was the Anchorage Times, I think, and that event collapsed in the early 70s!!!

There certainly were newspapers which transitioned earlier than with the debut of the Nikon F in 1959. Certainly, the Leica had been long established but with the new Nikon RF cameras there was every reason to adopt the miniature format long before 1959. But, again, there were die-hard holdouts and even for myself, when I bought my Minolta Autocord CdS in 1966, I had severe reservations with adopting the 'inferior' format. It was not until the Canon AE-1 came out in 1976 that I probed that format's capabilities. I really think that with photojournalists the admission of something miniature being viable was a serious affront to their inherent masculinity. (Yes, they were ALL men then.)

Now, I am the first to say that my ignorance and stupidity were hand in hand with my acculturated perceptions. - David Lyga

 

[brainmonster]

This thread is inspiring me to pick up a mamiya press now I really like the aesthetic of it. What are the advantages of a press type camera and why were they popular at one point? The main advantage that I can see is the interchangeable backs, allowing you to use different crop factors on 120.

On the other hand, with all these backs and interchangeable lenses, I'm loathe to calibrate the rangefinder mechanism on it, which I imagine may cause problems

 

[David Lyga]

This thread is inspiring me to pick up a mamiya press now I really like the aesthetic of it. What are the advantages of a press type camera and why were they popular at one point? The main advantage that I can see is the interchangeable backs, allowing you to use different crop factors on 120.

On the other hand, with all these backs and interchangeable lenses, I'm loathe to calibrate the rangefinder mechanism on it, which I imagine may cause problems

Again from the little which I recollect, I think that the press camera was actually part of the photojournalist's attire. I would not put too much technical where the aesthetic should go. In that era, women had big hats, also. It was an 'era' not especially trademarked by efficiency or conciseness. - David Lyga

 

[AgX]

So, other than technical requirements, ignorance, maleness and stubborness we now can add fashion as cause.

 

[David Lyga]

So, other than technical requirements, ignorance, maleness and stubborness we now can add fashion as cause.

In some ways, that is the case. Life was a bit different at that time. Priorities were different; societal norms prevailed. For example, people did not go out to eat without dressing up. People fit into an inviolable, societal mold whereby breaking away, because of personal preference, was not usually allowed. There were some gadflies who got away with it, but that was not the norm. The 'structure' of the photojournalist HAD to be as such: in a slight way, that big camera was part of his uniform. - David Lyga

 

[wiltw]

I got curious about the number of photos from the 1950s of photojournalists pictured with their cameras. Holding them, using them, and posed with them.

I Googled 'photojournalsits 1950' and searched for images. Google presented a lot of images, but I did not page thru them all...merely all those images presented on the first two 'pages' of hits. I never counted shots of cameras alone with no one in the shot.; I also avoided shots of 'collections' with someone posed next to the collection. And alhought I asked for photojonalists 1950, five photos of relatively modern SLRs (not the the 1950s in appearance, obviously) showed, but I did not count these.

• 15 sheet film cameras (press cameras, field cameras)
• 1 movie camera
• 7 TLRs
• 18 rangefinder 135 format

Clearly 135 rangefinder use had displaced a lot of sheet film camera use. I was surprised at the relatively few TLRs pictured. And zero 135 format SLRs from the 1950s!

 

[Dennis-B]

So, other than technical requirements, ignorance, maleness and stubborness we now can add fashion as cause.

To add, "fashion" as a general requirement, is very much a factor. Well before WWII, psychologists and social scientists started studying what drove people to make the decisions they did and do. Whether it's buying a house, automobile, camera, clothing, whatever. People and organizations make decisions based on some inner drive. And the companies which cater to those wants and needs use available means to fulfill those needs. It's also what drives technology, which ultimately drives science. Companies everywhere spend huge sums on research and development to find out if a product will be successful; whether this month's ad campaign will increase market share, etc. People's behavior in many instances, is quite predictable. Marketers use this as a tool for a company's own benefit.

While there are a host of reasons for it's failure, Ford's Edsel was really a marketing failure. Technically, the car was superb for the era. However, marketing folks badly overestimated the styling cues, and push-button gear selectors and other whiz-bang features did not save the car.

 

[brainmonster]

I wonder why you found zero 1950's SLRs. Perhaps SLRs still were in their early form in those days, but by the late 1950's we had quite a few models, like the Retina and others that were quite good. People even these days seem to fetishize rangefinders though. In general, they were low weight and the lenses were superb.

I haven't had great luck with rangefinders though, all the one's I've bought have some kind of problem. The SLR "boom" seemed to have happened in the 1960's. The rangefinder *seems* a little more old fashioned than the SLR.

Nowadays, rangefinders and their lenses seem to command a premium price - people seem to be willing to spend large amounts on rangefinders. I just bought a Canon 7 and I'm not super impressed. I can see why some people might prefer them, but I don't understand why they are willing to pay so much more for them.

I got curious about the number of photos from the 1950s of photojournalists pictured with their cameras. Holding them, using them, and posed with them.
Clearly 135 rangefinder use had displaced a lot of sheet film camera use. I was surprised at the relatively few TLRs pictured. And zero 135 format SLRs from the 1950s!