Who's the Greatest

[cuthbert]

Cool photo, thanks for sharing.

For sure......back in the day when analog photography ment manual, all the way.
Tough times for some.

Found his name: David Harvey...Magnum agency and NG.

If a Spotmatic was good enough for a NG pro during the Vietnam war it means it's a truly professional camera, isn't it?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Alan_Harvey

 

[ColColt]

If you look closely at that camera's prism I think there's a large F on the front of it.

 

[cuthbert]

If you look closely at that camera's prism I think there's a large F on the front of it.

You're drunk!

The camera is half the size of the F with the 135mm!

David Harvey in Vietnam, 1972. Asahi Pentax Spotmatic SLR with a standard or slightly wide-angle lens. The SLR hanging below has a short 135mm telephoto lens. Sometimes I carried a third SLR with a longer 300mm telephoto lens. Bell and Howell 16HR. Less
Howell 16Hr, 300Mm Telephoto, 135Mm Telephoto, Slr, Asahi Pentax, Wide Angles Lens, Longer 300Mm, Wideangl Lens, David Harvey

https://www.pinterest.com/usmcwayne/photogs/

Found another Spottie:

Also this one has a big F on the prism?

http://1stmibarsinvietnam.org/Handheld/Handheld_Instructions.htm

This GI is loading a Canon FT:

This is a Minolta:

So...not only Nikons and Leicas.

 

[ColColt]

You're drunk!

The camera is half the size of the F with the 135mm!

No, sir...don't drink. I was teasing anyway.

Also this one has a big F on the prism?

By golly, you're right!

 

[Paul Howell]

I have to admit I know little about Pentax SLR's but, if I were in that situation I think I'd have at least one F2, a Leica M2 or M4 and a Canon F-1. Of course, a trusty Gossen Luna Pro would be handy to have.

In the 80s I covered Africa for the last days of UPI then as a freelancer, this including several civil wars with a F3, the F3 does not have a rep for electronic failure. Over the decades the LED are prone to losing contrast. The F3 has aperture priority which at times can be very helpful, the only grip I had is the low flash syn. Having shot with both the F2 and F3 I would pick the F3, then if I had a choice it would be a F5.

 

[ColColt]

the F3 does not have a rep for electronic failure. Over the decades the LED are prone to losing contrast.

Then why choose it? The F2 has no LCD and without batteries still has all shutter speeds available.

 

[Alan Gales]

Then why choose it? The F2 has no LCD and without batteries still has all shutter speeds available.

I never understood the big deal about 35mm cameras being battery independent. I shot a Contax 139 for years and just carried extra batteries with me. Button cells are inexpensive, tiny and you don't feel the extra weight in your bag at all.

 

[ColColt]

You have a valid point, however; I recall a few instances where time to get the shot was of the essence. Case in point was some 15 years back when they brought the "Traveling Viet Nam Wall" here and a lot of dignitaries were there, General Westmoreland among them. It was misting rain and they weren't on the stage that long so, I kept shooting while they were. Had my meter died I could still shoot. If it had been some models I would have lost the ability to shoot since many today are battery dependent.

 

[rthollenbeck]

Found his name: David Harvey...Magnum agency and NG.

If a Spotmatic was good enough for a NG pro during the Vietnam war it means it's a truly professional camera, isn't it?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Alan_Harvey

Well, I know you jest (kinda) about the Minolta be a pro camera. At the same time I would and have no room to claim I am a pro. I still think the XK and the XD-7 have to be taken seriously. Minolta aliance with Lieca also spauned some serious tool.
The simalarties between the Minolta XG-7s and Leica R4s I had seemed very obvious to me.

Minolta may not have had a real "System Camera" but they were not to be dismissed. I respect Minolta SLRs as a serious effort in very competitive arena.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I never understood the big deal about 35mm cameras being battery independent. I shot a Contax 139 for years and just carried extra batteries with me. Button cells are inexpensive, tiny and you don't feel the extra weight in your bag at all.

Some cameras use batteries that are no longer available. With the Hasselblad 503 CX, batteries are not needed for operation. Same for the Leica III's for example.

 

[Alan Gales]

You have a valid point, however; I recall a few instances where time to get the shot was of the essence. Case in point was some 15 years back when they brought the "Traveling Viet Nam Wall" here and a lot of dignitaries were there, General Westmoreland among them. It was misting rain and they weren't on the stage that long so, I kept shooting while they were. Had my meter died I could still shoot. If it had been some models I would have lost the ability to shoot since many today are battery dependent.

In a situation like that I would have put fresh batteries in the camera before I left the house. I have done that for special events.

There is of course always Murphy's law.

 

[ColColt]

All jokes, puns and tongue in cheek comments aside, I'm just happy I can afford what I want to shoot and still have good eyes to see...regardless the camera. There were many good film cameras made and we all have our favorites.

 

[Alan Gales]

All jokes, puns and tongue in cheek comments aside, I'm just happy I can afford what I want to shoot and still have good eyes to see...regardless the camera. There were many good film cameras made and we all have our favorites.

Amen.

 

[Paul Howell]

Then why choose it? The F2 has no LCD and without batteries still has all shutter speeds available.

The meter is in the body so all finders are metered, being on the vertically challenged side I used the waist level finder when holding the camera over my head upside down to get a shot, with aperture priority I could the lens wide open and let the camera set the shutter speed when I could not see the readout in the finder. The shutter was very accurate, the camera was lighter, carry 2 bodies, one with a motor drive 2 or 3 additional lens, a flash, a dozen rolls of film for up to 12 hours, any reduction in weight is welcome. The F3 P was weathered sealed, had a hot shoe, upgraded gears and other mechanics. Some called it the militarized version, I don't know if the American military used the P model, someone me told be years ago that Japaneses Army used the P, never confirmed.

In the field there were occasions that I to dig mud out from around indexing lever on a F or F2.

It is not that that the F2 was not a great camera, it was, when I shot with the F2 I was very happy with it. Yet there was a reason that Nikon came out with the F3, followed by the F4 and F5. I had considered the Pentax LX, higher flash syn, shutter would fire at high speeds without a battery, the motor drive was quieter. I decided on the F3, due to Nikon's great service system, I could rent lens that I did not use on a routine bases, and the wires used Nikon, so I needed a Nikon to memo out lens for an assignment.

 

[cuthbert]

It is not that that the F2 was not a great camera, it was, when I shot with the F2 I was very happy with it. Yet there was a reason that Nikon came out with the F3, followed by the F4 and F5. I had considered the Pentax LX, higher flash syn, shutter would fire at high speeds without a battery, the motor drive was quieter. I decided on the F3, due to Nikon's great service system, I could rent lens that I did not use on a routine bases, and the wires used Nikon, so I needed a Nikon to memo out lens for an assignment.

Good observation: the LX is IMO a better camera than the F3, but Pentax never tried to match Nikon and Canon services for professionals.

 

[ColColt]

The F3 is a fine looking camera and I nearly bought the F3HP but had read about it's Achilles heel, the LCD panel and decided against it plus you have one shutter speed available should the battery die and you don't have extra batteries. It's just what you started out with and for an ol' Luddite like me, it was the Nikon F-sans batteries.

 

[Les Sarile]

The F3 is a fine looking camera and I nearly bought the F3HP but had read about it's Achilles heel, the LCD panel and decided against it plus you have one shutter speed available should the battery die and you don't have extra batteries.

The F3 can also use the batteries in the motor drive as it's battery source when the batteries in the body dies.

 

[Paul Howell]

The F3 is a fine looking camera and I nearly bought the F3HP but had read about it's Achilles heel, the LCD panel and decided against it plus you have one shutter speed available should the battery die and you don't have extra batteries. It's just what you started out with and for an ol' Luddite like me, it was the Nikon F-sans batteries.

My comments for moving to the F3 were vaild in the day. If I was buy a manual focus pro level system today I would get either a F2 or a Canon F1n, for those reasons, if a F3 fails there are few parts. I read a post a couple of years ago that some repair tech can get new circuit boards for the F3 and 4 from Korea, still dont want in that situation. For the true Luddite there is always the Spotmatic.

 

[ColColt]

For the true Luddite there is always the Spotmatic.

I love it!

 

[ColColt]

I went to my favorite source online for used camera gear and they had a F3HP for $238 and a F2AS for $499. both were rated EX. Must be a reason for that, you think?

 

[Alan Gales]

I went to my favorite source online for used camera gear and they had a F3HP for $238 and a F2AS for $499. both were rated EX. Must be a reason for that, you think?

I remember talking to a camera salesman I knew when the F3's came out. He told me a lot of pros were buying up the existing stock of F2's because they were afraid of the electronics in the F3's. People were also afraid of the Contax's that came out with built in motor drives. Both proved to be reliable and the future.

It's just that these cameras are so old now and the electronics are sometimes failing. When first made I doubt that they were expected to last 30 years +.

 

[cuthbert]

...then there is the "classic" vibe. And knowing that you can always repair a mechanical camera, no matter what.

I love it!

The Spottie is probably the greatest "simple" SLR IMO.

 

[Paul Howell]

I remember talking to a camera salesman I knew when the F3's came out. He told me a lot of pros were buying up the existing stock of F2's because they were afraid of the electronics in the F3's. People were also afraid of the Contax's that came out with built in motor drives. Both proved to be reliable and the future.

It's just that these cameras are so old now and the electronics are sometimes failing. When first made I doubt that they were expected to last 30 years +.

That's true, there were lots of PJ who did not trust the F3, for that matter the Canon T90. My second body was a Leica IIIG or Canon 7S, I was living in Southern Italy and had an assingment and needed to travel light I left my rangefinders at home, well guess what was not there when I returned. I ordered a FA with winder, but the sales guy sold it when I did did show the very next pay to pick it up, and it was paid for, this was in London. To make up for it they gave me my money back and at cost a FG, the only compact body they had in stock with the motor drive and the matching TTL flash. I thought I would use until I could get a FA. Although it had a lower flash syn than i wanted the FG was nice little camera, the motor drive at 3.5 FPS was respectable. Not pro build quality but the price was right and next year my body let me know that my days as a PJ were over I had not upgraded. My son still the FG and a few lens.

 

[rthollenbeck]

Well press photographers could afford to be fickle about what camera they used or at least had the pull to get or aford what they wanted as tools of the trade. It's sure is awful nice to have the camera you want..... But the truth be known it's a lot like a car, you don't need a BMW to drive to work it just makes things nice..... For all this talk about the greatest, most all of us can aford to be fickle with the price of photo equipment now, I seriously doubt any of us take better pictures because we have an F2 or miss any shots because we don't.

 

[Les Sarile]

I went to my favorite source online for used camera gear and they had a F3HP for $238 and a F2AS for $499. both were rated EX. Must be a reason for that, you think?

A lot more F3's in better shape and less costly to maintain.