What was the MOST BEAUTIFUL camera?

[Slixtiesix]

The Beautyflex :-D

Dead Link Removed

 

[Brett Rogers]

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

 

[Zathras]

Black Spotmatic SP

I couldn't agree more!!!

 

[pdeeh]

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]

Not intended for GAS

 

[Theo Sulphate]

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]

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...

 

[benjiboy]

The Canon EF the one they call " black beauty".

 

[cuthbert]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

 

[Lamar]

Steven Wright says 42.7% of all statistics are made up on the spot.....

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.

 

[bdial]

Just like people, they are all beautiful in their own way.
One highlight for me is the Kodak Bantam Special.

 

[JPJackson]

Very partial to Gandolfi and Deardorff field cameras.

 

[BainDarret]

Leica IIIG with a 5 cm collapsible Summicron.

 

[DWThomas]

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]

For me personally there are 3, 1 is the werra range, so simple and uncluttered, and very small, the second is the Vitessa barn door range by Voigtlander, and third for me would be the Zeiss Ikon Contessa folder, so tiny fits into any pocket, even when opened up very tiny
Richard

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]

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]

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.

 

[Lamar]

Cars are simply tools as well but there sure are some that look better than others....

 

[RobC]

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.

 

[Hatchetman]

Kodak Bantam Special

 

[ToddB]

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.