bucket list camera

[benjiboy]

Good for you Frank if that's what you want but speaking personally I don't want or need any more cameras even if they are giving them away, I already have, nine which is more than enough for me.

 

[mklw1954]

I also have many more cameras than I "need". However, why ever pass up a great deal such as this one? It's fun to use a wide variety of cameras as they are all at least slightly different. And, importantly, chances are you are rescuing that gear from ending up in a landfill.

 

[benjiboy]

I also have many more cameras than I "need". However, why ever pass up a great deal such as this one? It's fun to use a wide variety of cameras as they are all at least slightly different. And, importantly, chances are you are rescuing that gear from ending up in a landfill.

In the eyes of normal everyday people even owning the nine cameras I have is is considered a little eccentric, how many cameras do you need to own before men in white coats come for you and put you in a rubber room on the funny farm ?

 

[Alan Gales]

In the eyes of normal everyday people even owning the nine cameras I have is is considered a little eccentric, how many cameras do you need to own before men in white coats come for you and put you in a rubber room on the funny farm ?

Hey Ben, how many cars does Jay Leno own? Everyone seems fine with that. Automobiles are a lot more expensive and take up a lot more room. I ask what's wrong with a few cameras?

 

[frank]

stamps, watches, fountain pens, pokemon ...

 

[cooltouch]

In addition to cameras, I collect fountain pens, guitars, and motorcycles. I have over 40 cameras. They take up more room than the fountain pens, but less than the guitars, and a lot less than the motorcycles. So there's usually always room for one more. I haven't given any thought to a bucket list camera, more like lenses. Yeah, now bucket list lenses, that's something I can get behind. And telescopes -- yeah, light buckets for a bucket list!

 

[Theo Sulphate]

In the eyes of normal everyday people even owning the nine cameras I have is is considered a little eccentric ...

Nine?!?! I had no idea you had nine - just the F-1N's and the EF. Anyway, nine, that's pretty cool.

Women have lots of shoes, you know. So, it's all ok.

... Yeah, now bucket list lenses, that's something I can get behind. ...

Really. I just can't seem to find certain 35mm lenses. Like 35/2 FD, 35/2 OM, or 35/2 M42 Super Takumar.

Many months ago someone on APUG had a great F-1N outfit, near mint I'd say, with a set of lenses including 35/2.8 -- I didn't buy it. I'm an idiot.

 

[frank]

NINE cameras Benjiboy? I can't hardly take your admonitions against collecting seriously anymore.

 

[cooltouch]

Women have lots of shoes, you know. So, it's all ok.

And purses! Leave us not forget purses!

Really. I just can't seem to find certain 35mm lenses. Like 35/2 FD, 35/2 OM, or 35/2 M42 Super Takumar.

Many months ago someone on APUG had a great F-1N outfit, near mint I'd say, with a set of lenses including 35/2.8 -- I didn't buy it. I'm an idiot.

Dunno how you feel about eBay, but it has a great selection of all of the above . . . at eBay prices, of course. That's where I bought my F-1N and AE Motor Drive FN and several of my FD lenses. But I've also done pretty well by Craigslist -- better in fact than eBay. Much better, come to think of it.

 

[blockend]

Make books of your own photographs. The effort of compiling them and placing the images in a way that does them justice will remove all your gear acquisitional tendencies. Your negatives won't fester in a drawer and you'll have something to show other people will understand.

 

[onre]

Make books of your own photographs. The effort of compiling them and placing the images in a way that does them justice will remove all your gear acquisitional tendencies. Your negatives won't fester in a drawer and you'll have something to show other people will understand.

Everyone should do this.

 

[skorpiius]

Make books of your own photographs. The effort of compiling them and placing the images in a way that does them justice will remove all your gear acquisitional tendencies. Your negatives won't fester in a drawer and you'll have something to show other people will understand.

Great idea

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

More importantly than anything else in this thread, have you gotten out and used it yet? How do you like the results?

 

[frank]

Used it yes. Took a few frames on my walk with the dog. Film is not yet finished. Viewfinder info has disappeared and even at home in dim light it is absent. I did see it for a while. I can use the camera on manual with a handheld meter or use an auto exposure mode not knowing one of the exposure parameters. I notice that the button on the front that is supposed to turn on the display (like a half press of the shutter button) has no physical movement. Like it's stuck or bottomed out. Anyway, no viewfinder display.

Aside from this glitch, ergonomically it's a nice body. I prefer my Nikon F4 but that may be just because I'm very familiar with it and the Contax is new to me.

 

[benjiboy]

NINE cameras Benjiboy? I can't hardly take your admonitions against collecting seriously anymore. [/QUOTE

I'm not a collector Frank I use all my cameras on a regular basis I have 4 Canon F1N bodies, 1 Canon EF, 1 Canon T90, 1 Zeiss Contax 11 rangefinder, camera a Minox 35GT compact and a Mamiya C330F TLR.
My outfit makes sense for someone like myself who is retired and able to go out and shoot almost every day, I use mainly the F1's 1 loaded with FP4 Plus and one with HP5 Plus when I want to shoot monochrome and one of the other F1's to shoot slides and the other to shoot colour prints depending on what I want to do that day and the weather conditions, I use the EF mainly for fill in flash because it syncs. at 1/125 sec ( the F1's sync. at 1/90 sec ) the Contax 11 ( a keepsake my dad brought back from Germany after WW11 ) and the Minox I use for street shooting, the T90 mainly when I need TTL flash and the Mamiya C330 F for my medium format work.
All my lenses for my SLR's fit and work correctly on all my Canon camera bodies and I.M.O. my having nine cameras refined after more than sixty years of photography make perfect sense as a practical outfit for someone who is as keen on photography as myself.

 

[frank]

Just teasing you, Ben!

 

[Alan Gales]

Ben, you need to make it an even 10. You are missing a large format camera!

 

[benjiboy]

Ben, you need to make it an even 10. You are missing a large format camera!

I've never wanted a large format camera or a Leica Alan, there's a lot to be said for being happy with what you have and not lusting after more and more stuff, I've had almost all my current gear for more than 25 years and just enjoy using equipment that's so familiar that I can use it without thinking. My cameras are a means to an end, not an end in theirselves

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Frank, selling RF or even scale to buy SLR is the sin to me!
I'm planning to sell one SLR lens, to get one RF lens.
And if I get lucky it is going to be Ontario made lens!
Also, the Ukranian copy of Contax is on its way to me from Europe, I hope.
Cheers, Ko.

 

[Alan Gales]

I've never wanted a large format camera or a Leica Alan, there's a lot to be said for being happy with what you have and not lusting after more and more stuff, I've had almost all my current gear for more than 25 years and just enjoy using equipment that's so familiar that I can use it without thinking. My cameras are a means to an end, not an end in theirselves

Nothing wrong with that, Ben. Shoot what works for you.

I started in 35mm and shot a Contax 139 for many years but I always felt the format was too long. For the way I see, I favor a more square or square format. When digital brought film camera prices down I got into medium format. Then I came across an article Ken Rockwell wrote about the Tachihara 4x5 camera and thought I'd like to try that. I now have a Wehman 8x10, a Mamiya C220 f, a 35mm Stereo Realist, and a Fujinon X100s digital. Life is good!

 

[wiltw]

When I was 14, this was my object of lust. $420 with with 55mm f/1.4 lens, the first SLR offered commercially for sale with TTL exposure metering. When it was launched, the median family annual income in the USA was about $6500, so the camera was equal to 3.4 weeks pay. It was the equivalent of buying 1400 gallons of gas.

I bought this one about two years ago, fully functioning, for $25 in a thrift store, fulfilling 50 years of lust.

 

[Theo Sulphate]

When I was 14, this was my object of lust. ...

...

Oh yes, always wanted one. I've never seen one for sale at a swap meet.

 

[Cycler]

Sadly, we don't have thrift stores in the UK. And photo 'classics' rarely turn up. Trouble is that there's lots of items just gathering dust because folk are ashamed of using 'obsolete kit!'

 

[cooltouch]

When I was 14, this was my object of lust. $420 with with 55mm f/1.4 lens, the first SLR offered commercially for sale with TTL exposure metering. When it was launched, the median family annual income in the USA was about $6500, so the camera was equal to 3.4 weeks pay. It was the equivalent of buying 1400 gallons of gas.

I bought this one about two years ago, fully functioning, for $25 in a thrift store, fulfilling 50 years of lust.

Today's price is a great deal. I wonder what the current techno wonders will be selling for in 50 years -- if they still work at all, that is.

I got to thinking about that 1400 gallons of gasoline figure, though, and I came up with this. Your current top prosumer camera with a good lens is gonna set you back around $4000 -- $3000 for the camera and another $1000 for a good lens. Divide that number by $2.20, which is about what gasoline is selling for per gallon around here, and I get 1818.1818, or a bit over 1800 gallons of gasoline equivalent for a modern technowonder. So not much has changed, eh? Except, if anything, we're going in the wrong direction.

 

[wiltw]

Today's price is a great deal. I wonder what the current techno wonders will be selling for in 50 years -- if they still work at all, that is.

I got to thinking about that 1400 gallons of gasoline figure, though, and I came up with this. Your current top prosumer camera with a good lens is gonna set you back around $4000 -- $3000 for the camera and another $1000 for a good lens. Divide that number by $2.20, which is about what gasoline is selling for per gallon around here, and I get 1818.1818, or a bit over 1800 gallons of gasoline equivalent for a modern technowonder. So not much has changed, eh? Except, if anything, we're going in the wrong direction.

In the first 10 years of d*gital cameras, they depreciated in market value at the rate of -36% or so compounded annually.
resale prices dropped like a stone, with only a few exceptions like the 5D. Historically Canon dSLRs had a market value half-life of only two years...every two years, lose 50% of value...$8000, two years later $4000, two years later $2000, two years later $1000. From one of my posts on another forum, about 4-5 years ago...

• The Canon EOS 1D MarkIII was introduced in 2007 at about $3800-3900; one sold on (forum) at around Oct 2011 for $1900, another was listed at $2250, another listed in April 2011 was $1975.
• The $6900 1DsII launched in 9/04 has had sales on (forum) for $3200-3500 in Oct 2008, so yes there are cameras that seem to not slide as fast.
• But looking at 1Ds and 20D and 350D, etc. they did generally follow that 2 year economic half life...$8000 1Ds's that sold for $1000-1500, for example.

As for gas, right now the price is down considerable from the peak...about -25% compared to a couple years ago. Figure again with your peak gas prices, not today's reduced price. In median annual income terms, you could buy 21700 gallons of gas with a median income in 1964, but now (using 2014 figures) the median annual income buys 23600 gallons of gas (at 2014 median gas price). Back in 1964 you could go to USC for $1200, in 2014 you spend $47,500 for tuition.