- Joined
- Sep 10, 2009
- Messages
- 3,589
- Format
- Medium Format
Do you ever use the (n)ever-ready case? At one time, when Leicas, Contaxes, and other expensive precision instruments were sold, a camera case was almost always an integral part of the outfit. Instructions accompanying cameras would always warn that they were not hermetically sealed and dust and grit could enter and damage the inner works. Leitz even made available long purse-like bags should an owner prefer to slip a camera into his pocket rather can carry around the neck. A recent thread on Rollei 35 reliability made me wonder if cameras were carried uncased in pocket . When new, they were sold with cases for good reason. The only camera that I know about that doesn’t need a case is a Minox 8x11.
I remember that in the early 1960s some magazines began to promote the idea that since professional photographers never used cases, using a camera case was the sure sign of an amateur. However, the cameras that resided in big organization camera banks used by many professional were never described. But one should keep in mind President Regan’s comment about washing rented cars.
Speaking for myself, over the years camera cases have saved me a lot of grief (and money). My cased Rollei 2.8F, knocked out of my hands by toddler, fell about 5 feet onto an asphalt pavement with a loud clunk. The only damage was the latch pin; my ever-ready cased Hassy tumbled from the back seat of my Jeep onto a concrete floor—no damage; I have dropped or banged various RF and SL cameras against tables, etc. with no damage; and I have pocketed cameras with no damage. Not because I am rough, but over the course of 60+ years handling stuff, things happen. Yet, at times when I read complaints and lamentations on APUG faulting the need for camera repairs, I wonder if they are treating their equipment with the respect and care deserved for any precision instrument. For a non-photo equipment comparison, I have had a Winsor Newton # 12 water color brush (they now sell for over $600+) for about 40 yrs that is as good as new. Good equipment deserves respect.
Of course, I don’t mean necessarily having a camera in a case when actually in deliberate act of taking photographs because some cases are indeed NEVER-ready and awkward.
What do you think about cases?
I remember that in the early 1960s some magazines began to promote the idea that since professional photographers never used cases, using a camera case was the sure sign of an amateur. However, the cameras that resided in big organization camera banks used by many professional were never described. But one should keep in mind President Regan’s comment about washing rented cars.
Speaking for myself, over the years camera cases have saved me a lot of grief (and money). My cased Rollei 2.8F, knocked out of my hands by toddler, fell about 5 feet onto an asphalt pavement with a loud clunk. The only damage was the latch pin; my ever-ready cased Hassy tumbled from the back seat of my Jeep onto a concrete floor—no damage; I have dropped or banged various RF and SL cameras against tables, etc. with no damage; and I have pocketed cameras with no damage. Not because I am rough, but over the course of 60+ years handling stuff, things happen. Yet, at times when I read complaints and lamentations on APUG faulting the need for camera repairs, I wonder if they are treating their equipment with the respect and care deserved for any precision instrument. For a non-photo equipment comparison, I have had a Winsor Newton # 12 water color brush (they now sell for over $600+) for about 40 yrs that is as good as new. Good equipment deserves respect.
Of course, I don’t mean necessarily having a camera in a case when actually in deliberate act of taking photographs because some cases are indeed NEVER-ready and awkward.
What do you think about cases?