Holy Grail cameras

[dpurdy]

Maybe the question should have been: Do you wish you had a different camera than the one you have.

 

[Kyle M.]

To me the "Holy Grail" is any camera that I really really want, but highly doubt that I'll ever be able to afford. The RZ67 and the Hasselblad were the only two on my list. I just happened to luck into an extremely good deal on both, especially the RZ67 I got the whole package in mint condition for $360. KEH is asking $342 for a EX+ 110mm F=2.8. The 'Blad I've got $600 in, but through KEH I'd have been close to $1000 for one in the same condition. I just happened to stumble upon good deals at a time that I was able to come up with the funds, or in this case trading material.

 

[Eric Rose]

I've had a number of cameras I lusted after. Eventually I have owned them all, used them, and moved on to some other light gathering boxes. The only one that might still present a bit of a tingle would be the Rollei SL66.

 

[rbultman]

For me the real holy grail would be unlimited time to use the cameras I already have.

That, and the enlarger.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

 

[benjiboy]

" it's sometimes better to travel hopefully than to arrive".

Sent from my KFOT using Tapatalk

 

[frank]

A good traveller has no fixed plans and is not intent on arriving.

(My signature on a motorcycle forum)

 

[Andrew K]

It's too hard...as cameras are now more affordable I've managed to buy/use and sometimes resell all the cameras I wish I could have afforded when they were introduced....

Having said that a Gowlandflex TLR or SLR would be fun...

 

[Matus Kalisky]

Well, my Mamiya 6 (which I own now, sadly I am selling it) was a holy grail camera for me and I enjoyed it immensely after I got it (took me several years to get there). There is still Contax 645 and Rolleiflex FX-N (yes - the latest one) that I would love to try and also some nice film Leica M body with 35/2.8 summaron. Are these cameras holy grail? Maybe in some sense. I rather consider them next-on-the-list in the long run

 

[flavio81]

Hello, Ben - thanks to you, I now have a Canon EF ("black beauty") and completely understand why you are content with such a fine camera. I'm surprised how little attention (or no attention) is given to this model on the internet (it does not appear on the otherwise excellent MIR site)..

I lusted for the EF for YEARS and YEARS until I got one. At the end i liked the F-1 and the New F-1 much better. The problems i found with the EF was:

1) you had to keep the camera in "off" at the max amount of times otherwise the battery gets drained quickly
2) focusing screen was dimmer compared to other Canon cameras
3) turning the camera "off" locks the shutter button which means I can't just use the battery for metering the exposure and then turn the exposure meter off while i wait for the "crucial moment" to take the picture (which can take minutes)
4) shutter was noticeably harsher (vibration-wise) compared to the FT-series, F-1-series, and A-series cameras (which are among the smoothest ever)
5) the New F-1 was nicer overall, in fact the best 35mm i've ever used.
6) even if turning off the camera before storing, the battery gets drained quickly (in one or two months). Ok, perhaps mine needed some electrical troubleshooting. But it's terrible compared to the battery frugalness of the Canon AE-1, Nikon F3, Nikon FE, and, apparently the Canon F-1N.

 

[randy6]

My holy grail camera is the Rolleiflex model 2.8b only 1250 made I had it cleaned and is my favorite shooter.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

If you already own them or are still looking for them, which camera(s) do you consider your personal holy grail?

One I've got: Paubel Makina 67W
Still out there: Hasselblad SWC

(Inspired by Paul's thread about his holy grail cameras)

Mamiya6/7 or Hasselblad 500c and I have the photographs to prove it

 

[benjiboy]

I lusted for the EF for YEARS and YEARS until I got one. At the end i liked the F-1 and the New F-1 much better. The problems i found with the EF was:

1) you had to keep the camera in "off" at the max amount of times otherwise the battery gets drained quickly
2) focusing screen was dimmer compared to other Canon cameras
3) turning the camera "off" locks the shutter button which means I can't just use the battery for metering the exposure and then turn the exposure meter off while i wait for the "crucial moment" to take the picture (which can take minutes)
4) shutter was noticeably harsher (vibration-wise) compared to the FT-series, F-1-series, and A-series cameras (which are among the smoothest ever)
5) the New F-1 was nicer overall, in fact the best 35mm i've ever used.
6) even if turning off the camera before storing, the battery gets drained quickly (in one or two months). Ok, perhaps mine needed some electrical troubleshooting. But it's terrible compared to the battery frugalness of the Canon AE-1, Nikon F3, Nikon FE, and, apparently the Canon F-1N.

If the EF would never have existed Flavio neither would the New F1, AE1, or A1 the EF was first sold in 1973 eight years before the New F1 and it's revolutionary hybrid electro-mechanical Copal Square shutter was the test bed for what eventually became the horizontal running hybrid electro-mechanical one incorporated in the New F1. With regard to the EF's focusing screen the technology in the early 1970's the era when the EF was manufactured the finer, brighter laser cut focusing screens that the later Canon models had didn't exist.
The EF was the first electronic camera that the Canon corporation ever made, and they learned a lot from it, your battery problem can be easily rectified by always carrying a couple of spare ones as I do, but I suggest you have it checked out by a camera technician, In response to your remarks about the EF's shutter your camera could be more than forty years old and has probably never been cleaned and lubricated since, I had my EF fully serviced about four years ago and it's as smooth as silk now.

 

[EASmithV]

8x10 Graflex SLR

 

[BradleyK]

Like Benjiboy I am more than satisfied with what I have. My Holy Grail? My F2s...any one of them; it doesn't really matter. The only camera I have ever lusted for is the M3 (or maybe the M4). Perhaps, though, it is more a question of satisfying my curiosity, given all the chatter generated: some innate "special-ness" or hype of the first order (my M6s seem to do ok, but maybe my standards are low...)

 

[benjiboy]

Like Benjiboy I am more than satisfied with what I have. My Holy Grail? My F2s...any one of them; it doesn't really matter. The only camera I have ever lusted for is the M3 (or maybe the M4). Perhaps, though, it is more a question of satisfying my curiosity, given all the chatter generated: some innate "special-ness" or hype of the first order (my M6s seem to do ok, but maybe my standards are low...)

Constantly lusting after and/ or buying more "stuff"is counter productive, I would rather expend the time and effort on thinking how I can take better pictures with what I have.

 

[Claudia Moroni]

One I've got: Mamiya 7
Still out there: Hasselblad Xpan

 

[frank]

Constantly lusting after and/ or buying more "stuff"is counter productive, I would rather expend the time and effort on thinking how I can take better pictures with what I have.

No gallery uploads? How about a website?

 

[benjiboy]

No gallery uploads? How about a website?

I don't put my work on the internet as a matter of policy, neither do I want a website for the same reasons.

 

[frank]

I don't put my work on the internet as a matter of policy, neither do I want a website for the same reasons.

So we'll just have to take your word that your work is really good because you aren't distracted by gear lust.

 

[Hatchetman]

alright I do lust for the new 50mm Summicron that will set you back about $8000.

 

[OptiKen]

My 'Holy Grail' is changeable. I would definitely like an old Leica....I would love a wooden view camera...etc.
The one constant and therefore, my Holy Grail, may just be a Kodak Bantam Special

 

[Sirius Glass]

Once I bought my Holy Grail cameras and film processor, I no longer experience GAS.

 

[benjiboy]

So we'll just have to take your word that your work is really good because you aren't distracted by gear lust.

Where did I write that "my work is really good " ?, I was making a philosophical point on the fruitlessness of dissipating ones efforts in constantly searching for the magic bullet in more equipment something I have learned by long experience, whether my work is good bad or indifferent is irrelevant.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Where did I write that "my work is really good " ?, I was making a philosophical point on the fruitlessness of dissipating ones efforts in constantly searching for the magic bullet in more equipment something I have learned by long experience, whether my work is good bad or indifferent is irrelevant.

Some are too judgmental of those who choose not to post on the internet. They are haunted by their own short comings. Jus' sayin'

 

[frank]

Well, it would support your point, which without any supporting evidence, is just your oft repeated opinion.

To support my view that involvement with various gear is not necessarily detrimental to ones photography, is that I'm both a gear head and happy with my photography. I do not think that sticking to a limited amount of gear would have made my photography better. It would simply have deprived me of much satisfaction in having tried many of the different tools (cameras and lenses) that are available. Ill get pictures that satisfy me no matter what gear I use. I don't have to stick to a limited selection. And this you can judge for yourself from my website.