I don't think that's a very good analogy, because it intimates that the general public has equally poor taste in healthy nutrition and cameras.Ae1 is like the Big Mac of burgers. Millions sold.
I don't think that's a very good analogy, because it intimates that the general public has equally poor taste in healthy nutrition and cameras.Ae1 is like the Big Mac of burgers. Millions sold.
I don't think that's a very good analogy, because it intimates that the general public has equally poor taste in healthy nutrition and cameras.
True, equating popularity with quality in most things only proves how uneducated and undiscerning the public's tastes are.Actually, a depressing number of people believe that anything sold in large enough numbers is good. Same basic type of halfwits who thought Michael Jackson was good because he made lots of money.
And some people think that because the ae1 sold in large numbers, it is a great camera.
My perspective is that the ae1 marked the switch over point where cameras became a mass-produced, disposable item, instead of something meant to last for a lifetime with periodic maintenance, and even passed down from one generation to the next. If/when it broke, it was meant to be tossed away. For me, the ae1 marked this change in attitude in cameras. (paradigm-shift) I understand that one can't blame this (first world) change in thinking on a single camera maker or model, but that is the personal association that I have with the ae1. I understand that not everyone feels the same way. That's okay. This is just an attempt at explaining my negative attitude to the ae1.
My AE-1 was passed down to me...farther to son...
And is lasting with periodic (once every 30 years) maintenance...
Ah, but remember, you're a special case.
Joking aside, this just goes to show you how individual life experiences shape ones opinions. If my father bequeathed me an ae1, I would think differently about it.
That's sad, I'm sorry you wouldn't appreciate being given a thoughtful gift from your parents. That does tell of how one might have been shaped...
I'm not sure how you got that conclusion from my post.
I acknowledged that a gift from a parent WOULD shape ones view.
Quite the opposit of your post.
My father's gift to me was his old German Kodak Rettinette, which certainly influenced my preference for mechanical cameras.
You can say anything about the AE-1 but it got a lot of people into photography.
Jeff
I suppose it's all in how you shoot. I really mostly use full manual mode all the time, but is usually start with... Well what subject am I working with...? Is it moving, or still? Do I want it to move or blur? And then decide what kind of depth I would like to play with, then balance those and begin shooting, I don't really mess with the shutter speed once I've decided what I want, and stick to mostly 1/60 or 1/125 or 1/250 for almost any circumstance. But during the shoot I usually stick to the chosen shutter speed.
But that's me...
Everyone is different, the OP will have to decide what they want.
And some people think that because the ae1 sold in large numbers, it is a great camera.
My perspective is that the ae1 marked the switch over point where cameras became a mass-produced, disposable item, instead of something meant to last for a lifetime with periodic maintenance, and even passed down from one generation to the next. If/when it broke, it was meant to be tossed away. For me, the ae1 marked this change in attitude in cameras. (paradigm-shift)
Yeah, there is no one right answer. Everyone has what works for them.![]()
Of course there is a 'right answer' and here it is:
Neither. I don't trust anything newer than a Nikkormat FT2; it uses a battery only for the meter, uses cells you can actually get, and uses pre AI lenses.
![]()
In cultural terms I think that kind of makes sense, but I don't think it actually describes the AE-1 very accurately. As far as I remember, they were still expensive enough that people had them repaired instead of replacing them, and they seem to take periodic service perfectly well. IMHO, the "disposable" aspect didn't come in until the advent of cheapo auto-everything P&S cameras in the 1980s/90s.
I don't have a strong feeling on it personally, but it seems like a reasonable person could argue that the AE-1 is "great" in some sense precisely *because* of the mass-produced aspect. It's sort of the Brownie of its era---a camera that made photography accessible to masses of people, with some compromises. Unlike the Brownie, though, those compromises related to handling and feature set rather than to "performance" in the sense of image quality.
-NT
This has been hinted at before, but I consider it important:
Who ever is into using different camera makes and types should think of the working-orientation of the focusing barrel of Nikon cameras.
Which is not shared by many. Conservatively speaking...
Nikon RF, Contax/Kiev, and..
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY: ![]() |