Illogical preferences

[cliveh]

When printing, I use either use Schneider or Rodenstock lenses. I don’t really think there is much difference in quality between them. However, I do like the tiny race bearings employed on Rodenstock aperture rings. I know I should not be influenced by such tactile functions devoid of optical performance, but do others have similar introspective feelings about small mechanical functions on photographic apparatus?

 

[pstake]

I do.

And sometimes I want to kick myself in the b**ls for being such a mechanical-function snob.

I use a Valoy II. Mechanical engineering at its finest. Also just got a V35 that i have yet to set up. More of the same. Also shoot with a Contax RTS by which my mechanical-perfection fetish is satiated each time I feel the bearing-smooth precision of the film advance, or the just-right focus resistance of the Planar 50 1.4 on the front of it.

 

[eddie]

I'm with you, Clive. While two items may function measurably identically, there may be a certain tactile quality which makes me choose one over the other. I think it's normal.

 

[mrred]

There is a lot to be said about the "feel good" influence. I love my f6, f100............ but put a working Kiev 4a in my hands and perfection is attainable.

 

[Andrew Simpson]

There is also value in taming the imperfect to get what you want out of it.

A colleague at my camera club mentioned a couple of years back the he 'has bought the best camera and lens money can buy’. He subscribes to Moore's law, 18 months later the ‘best’ was replaced with the ‘best’ again.

Too often we can get hung up on perfection and lose sight of the art.

 

[MattKing]

There is nothing illogical about the Op's preference - the only thing that would be illogical would be to choose an inferior lens for that reason.

 

[TimmyMac]

A good of the reason I love using old film equipment is because of the tactile feel... no shame in that. To achieve similar in digital you're looking at a $9000 M9 or (maybe) multi-kilobuck pro canikon gear. Even that doesn't REALLY compare.

 

[hdeyong]

I do.
My other hobby is restoring old cars, (which I haven't been able to indulge in recently). I do it because I like doing it, and good tools make all the difference. It's the same for anything that you're doing because you enjoy doing it, the best equipment will enhance the whole feeling of it. There's something very satisfying about a lens, film advance, or an automotive tool that works impeccably and feels like quality in your hand.
I have a couple of modern AF lenses that have that scratchy feel when focussed manually. Compared to a lovely old Takumar I use regularly, they feel like junk, and it feels less satisfying to use them.

 

[steven_e007]

I had a Kiev 60 once - a terrible camera, but I loved the fact it was so very heavy and I really miss the uniquely Ukraine tank factory like smell of the grease. I'm tempted to get another from one of these companies that rebuild them to make them more reliable. I kid myself it is because a rebuilt Kiev might be more reliable than an old second hand Pentacon 6 - but deep down I know it is the recycled Soviet tank like qualities that appeal

 

[thegman]

Sounds OK to me, I prefer the feel of the Leica M3 to the MP, so I sold the MP. The MP is the better camera, built in meter and all the rest, but I prefer the feel of the M3.

 

[pstake]

Couldn't it be argued today that using any camera or process that does not require special knowledge nor an understanding of light (among other things) — and that does not focus for you and yield immediate results — is illogical?

It was logic that led all these people to choose digital cameras.

The thing that led you to prefer the aperture ring on the Rodagon over the Componon is another symptom of the disease that drives you to be a part of analog photography, in general. Certainly not a bad thing. It's refined discernment.

And just a touch snobbishness, like I said before.

 

[Roger Cole]

Couldn't it be argued today that using any camera or process that does not require special knowledge nor an understanding of light (among other things) — and that does not focus for you and yield immediate results — is illogical?

It was logic that led all these people to choose digital cameras.

The thing that led you to prefer the aperture ring on the Rodagon over the Componon is another symptom of the disease that drives you to be a part of analog photography, in general. Certainly not a bad thing. It's refined discernment.

And just a touch snobbishness, like I said before.

+1, "Like" etc.

 

[John Koehrer]

Opinions differ. In almost everything. The gent who buys the "best" every 18 months doesn't meet your definition of logical but it does meet his.
Everybody's got one. Opinion that is.