What was the MOST BEAUTIFUL camera?

Brett Rogers

Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2012
Messages
213
Format
Multi Format
No particular order:
Contax II & 50mm f/1.5
Voigtlander Prominent
Exakta Varex IIa embossed
Voigtlander Vitessa
Voigtlander Superb
Rolleicord Art Deco
Rolleiflex 2.8D
Contaflex twin lens reflex
Black F & plain prism
Rectaflex SLR
Contax S/D & Biotar
Voigtlander Vito III
Voigtlander Ultramatic CS
 

pdeeh

Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2012
Messages
4,765
Location
UK
Format
Multi Format
Original Werra - no shoe, no meter, no advance lever, no ISO dial, just a viewfinder, a lens and a (flush) shutter release. In olive green preferably.
Perfectly exquisite
 

baachitraka

Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2011
Messages
3,556
Location
Bremen, Germany.
Format
Multi Format
Not intended for GAS

 

Attachments

  • IMG_4937.jpg
    140 KB · Views: 840

Theo Sulphate

Member
Joined
Jul 3, 2014
Messages
6,489
Location
Gig Harbor
Format
Multi Format
There are so many beautiful ones. My choice: Minolta SRT-101, chrome with chrome dial, with a 58/1.2 MC Nikkor.

That's what appeared in the ads in the early 1970's.
 

Andy38

Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2008
Messages
242
Location
Lyon , Franc
Format
Medium Format
Hello,

Kodak Beau Brownie (whatever color may be), black OM1 without flash-shoe, silver 500 CM and a Gilles-Faller 13 x 18 (but I don't use it : too heavy !).

But many others are beautiful...
 

cuthbert

Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2014
Messages
822
Format
35mm
IMO the most beautiful camera is the Leica M3.

In the SLR arena I have a soft spot for cameras without hot shoe, so for me the best are the Spotmatic and the Canon F-1 old.
 

guangong

Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2009
Messages
3,589
Format
Medium Format
It depends

It depends upon aesthetic criteria. In trrms of a simple clean design for a capaple camera:Leicaflex sl . Viewed from the standpoint of a beautiful piece of mechanical engineering: Rolleiflex F2.8 or Hassy 500 or 2000fcm. From the viewpoint of beauty of operation:leica m3 or m4 of original nikon f with plain prism finder.
 

RobC

Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
3,880
Location
UK
Format
Multi Format
give it a few dzays or weeks and we should have a list of pretty much every camera ever made. Which only goes to show that 99.999% of people are wrong.
 

Rick A

Subscriber
Joined
Mar 31, 2009
Messages
9,941
Location
Laurel Highlands
Format
8x10 Format
Cameras are like women, they are all beautiful, so I pick .....Karen. Oh, and for beautiful camera, my Century 11x14 field camera, cherry, brass, and leather. When she's out, nobody will look at any of your cameras. Matter of fact, you will probably put yours away and come ogle it.
 

Lamar

Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2008
Messages
375
Location
Georgia, USA
Format
35mm
If I had to choose the best looking it would be a very close match. The Leica III variants (a,b,c) come in at a very, very close 2nd but I think the Zorki 3S is best looking. All have classic lines with rounded corners and no ugly self-timer lever.

Disclaimer: My choice may vary week to week but today this is it.... with out a doubt...... I'm pretty sure.



 
Last edited by a moderator:

bdial

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 2, 2005
Messages
7,470
Location
North East U.S.
Format
Multi Format
Just like people, they are all beautiful in their own way.
One highlight for me is the Kodak Bantam Special.
 

DWThomas

Subscriber
Joined
Jun 13, 2006
Messages
4,605
Location
SE Pennsylvania
Format
Multi Format
It's all relative -- the day I brought it home as a 16 year old (at the end of 1957 or so), my new in the box Argus C-3 was gorgeous -- a "real" 35mm camera!

I don't have a specific brand in mind, but for a wow factor displayed in the living room, I'd lean toward one of the big view cameras in mahogany or cherry and brass. But then if i owned it, it likely would have to go outdoors occasionally!

:munch:
 

GRHazelton

Subscriber
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
2,249
Location
Jonesboro, G
Format
Multi Format

I could also vote for the barn door Vitessa and the Contessa. Both are gorgeous. Both are in my "collection." I could also vote for the Pentax LX.
 

Jim Jones

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 16, 2006
Messages
3,740
Location
Chillicothe MO
Format
Multi Format
Form follows function, not beauty, in modern cameras. In contrast, my Kodak revolving back cycle camera from about 100 years ago with its fine leather covering, red leather bellows, lacquered brass, and graceful wood is beautiful. If I had to pick among newer cameras, it would be a rangefinder Leica before the bloat began with the iiiG model.
 

Gerald C Koch

Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2010
Messages
8,131
Location
Southern USA
Format
Multi Format
I personally do not look at cameras as works of art. They are only tools. Does anyone look at electric drills as artistic? There is one exception and that was an old folder that had an art deco cover. Don't remember its name.
 

RobC

Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
3,880
Location
UK
Format
Multi Format
is a steam powered electricity generation cooling tower a tool or an aesthetically pleasing piece of industrial architecture. Come to that any piece of architecture must be functional and for purpose. So following your argument architecture is not art. You may have a point. But then again you may not if you're an architect. But there's an awful lot of photographers who go out and photograph this stuff, not as architecture but as art in the landscape. Have they have all got it wrong.

Contax used porsche designers to design "the look" of the RTS III. I guess that must have been a waste of time. A pair of jeans are just functional everyday wear. I guess all the people who buy them with a designer label on them so they can be seen with that label have got it wrong.

Humans are by and large pretty dim.
 

ToddB

Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2012
Messages
1,134
Format
Medium Format
The Rolleiflex series cameras. I'm reminded by strangers every time I take it out for stroll. It will punk a group of digital photographers in a beauty contest in a second.
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…