Wich cameras you think is necessary on a collection and why?

[blockend]

A good collector will acquire pristine examples of emblematic cameras. So the first SLR, an important Leica, maybe a Plaubel Makina, etc. They will almost certainly go up in value from a high starting point. Leave less than perfect examples to people who use them. Mainstream cameras made by the million will never be worth very much.

 

[hoffy]

Should have this thread been Called 'Ground breaking cameras that should in the ultimate collection'

While I don't necessarily get collecting cameras for collecting sake, people still do it.

I'll add one to the list, though - The Minolta 7000 (one without LCD bleed, of course)

 

[Steve Roberts]

I think some of the criticism of people who buy cameras as collectors' pieces is a little misplaced. For the kinds of cameras that are likely to be potential users, there are plenty to go around. As for driving up prices, again for the cameras likely to be used regularly, I'm not convinced that's the case. It may be true for a pristine, boxed Leica M3, but then who would buy that to take it out and get it dusty and wet anyway? Taking the longer view, come the day when all the users have been used, the collectors' cabinets can then be plundered for examples that have been kept in suspended animation! For most cameras that we'd likely want to take out and shoot with, we're hardly talking mortgage money.

To return to the OP's question (which was only seeking advice on cameras he should have, not whether he should be collecting in the first place!) I'll throw in another - the Zenit E. Though no great shakes specification-wise, it provided a first step into the world of SLR photography for many teenagers like myself in the 1970s who couldn't afford a Pentax and wanted to move upmarket from something like a Halina Paulette.

Steve

 

[blockend]

As for driving up prices, again for the cameras likely to be used regularly, I'm not convinced that's the case. It may be true for a pristine, boxed Leica M3, but then who would buy that to take it out and get it dusty and wet anyway?

People originally bought the M3 in that condition to use. It's a well made camera with a sharp lens. The fact it sells for thousands of pounds is entirely due to collectors removing them from the market. That trickles down to make all similar models expensive.

To return to the OP's question (which was only seeking advice on cameras he should have, not whether he should be collecting in the first place!) I'll throw in another - the Zenit E. Though no great shakes specification-wise, it provided a first step into the world of SLR photography for many teenagers like myself in the 1970s who couldn't afford a Pentax and wanted to move upmarket from something like a Halina Paulette.
Steve

I agree. Zenits and Prakticas are probably responsible for more documentary images of 60s and 70s Britain than any other makes because of the people they were sold to, not artists or serious photographers but those who bought them to record their other interests.

 

[Steve Roberts]

I agree. Zenits and Prakticas are probably responsible for more documentary images of 60s and 70s Britain than any other makes because of the people they were sold to, not artists or serious photographers but those who bought them to record their other interests.

A question for US members: did many Zenits and Prakticas make it to the States in the 60s & 70s, or did the their communist origins prevent their being freely sold there?
Steve

 

[fstop]

I think some of the criticism of people who buy cameras as collectors' pieces is a little misplaced. For the kinds of cameras that are likely to be potential users, there are plenty to go around. As for driving up prices, again for the cameras likely to be used regularly, I'm not convinced that's the case. It may be true for a pristine, boxed Leica M3, but then who would buy that to take it out and get it dusty and wet anyway? Taking the longer view, come the day when all the users have been used, the collectors' cabinets can then be plundered for examples that have been kept in suspended animation! For most cameras that we'd likely want to take out and shoot with, we're hardly talking mortgage money.

To return to the OP's question (which was only seeking advice on cameras he should have, not whether he should be collecting in the first place!) I'll throw in another - the Zenit E. Though no great shakes specification-wise, it provided a first step into the world of SLR photography for many teenagers like myself in the 1970s who couldn't afford a Pentax and wanted to move upmarket from something like a Halina Paulette.

Steve

Exactly

 

[polka]

I collect analog cameras, but not because of their brands, so I don't care about rising prices ; I buy any old camera that seems good looking, is functional and offered for a ridiculous prize ; and I use them to take pictures !

For instances of cameras that (I bought in spite of no particular reputation among collectors, and thus) got for peanuts :
a Konica AutoReflex T(2) which shutter was blocked (unblocked in 5 minutes)
a Miranda Auto Sensorex EE
a Rodenstock Citonette 645 folder (dated 1930s) with a 2,9/75mm Trinar Anastigmat and a Compur shutter.
etc.

I especially love (and use often) the Citonette, because of its compactness, and in spite of its "simple" and uncoated lens, I enlarge its pictures (in my "wet" lab) up to 30x40cm² and shot color negs too (which I scanned and printed A3+).

Bye Paul

 

[BobD]

Collecting vintage cameras is one of the factors that helps to keep film photography
alive. Camera collections help maintain camera values and thus their general
value as viewed by the public and they also help create interest in film photography
in people who would not otherwise be aware of its merits. Many people are
inspired to try film photography by seeing a collection of vintage cameras. The
more this occurs, the more demand for film is created and we all know what that
means.

Put a fine vintage camera in someone's hand and it often blows their mind --
few products made today compare with their obvious quality and charm. Seeing
and touching them often makes people want to use them.

Just as museums of all types help keep public interest alive in various fields, the
same is true of vintage camera collections. Collecting vintage cameras is good
for all of us.

 

[BillBingham2]

A question for US members: did many Zenits and Prakticas make it to the States in the 60s & 70s, or did the their communist origins prevent their being freely sold there?
Steve

Can't speak for the early to mid '60s as I don't remember them.....I was too young. But I did see Prakticas over here (Rochester NY) as a very low cost camera on the late '60s and mid '70s.

B2

 

[stark_674]

Cameras COLLECTION....

I am happy to see such a lot of reply to this thread and I want to clarify that talking about collection I intend a number of cameras to collect and to use of course.....
Maybe some of them to collect and not use for some reasons....
I want to share which cameras are good to use, which are simply milestones on camera evolution etc.... Which is your most-appreciated camera.
And I would like to limit this to analog non-AF cameras, 35 or MF or LF or rangefinder and whatelse.

For example I think that EXAKTA Varex 2a or 2b is a MUST HAVE camera (to use of course) cause is a great mechanical object.... I completely disassemble some of that and I did appreciate the way it is constructed. Using it you can feel the sensation of past times....

Bye to all

 

[fstop]

Collecting vintage cameras is one of the factors that helps to keep film photography
alive. Camera collections help maintain camera values and thus their general
value as viewed by the public and they also help create interest in film photography
in people who would not otherwise be aware of its merits. Many people are
inspired to try film photography by seeing a collection of vintage cameras. The
more this occurs, the more demand for film is created and we all know what that
means.

Put a fine vintage camera in someone's hand and it often blows their mind --
few products made today compare with their obvious quality and charm. Seeing
and touching them often makes people want to use them.

Just as museums of all types help keep public interest alive in various fields, the
same is true of vintage camera collections. Collecting vintage cameras is good
for all of us.

I agree and would add that someone needs to own the cameras up for sale,its better that a collector have a camera in storage than an indifferent owner simply tossing it in a closet.The reason prices on film cameras is dropping is that there aren't enough buyers willing to cough up the dough for a film camera.
I collect certain cameras as an investment that won't get used or used very little under controlled conditions,but I also buy inops and repair them to use.
The story has been repeated time and time again, "this was my fathers camera, he left it to me, I have no use for it..." and bingo you're the owner of a mint F3HP with case lens filters... for under $150 or a Mint- F2AS for 250.
As long as those deals come up I'm buying them, I'm not stopping because I already have one.

 

[Bill Burk]

... did many Zenits and Prakticas make it to the States in the 60s & 70s?

I was unlucky enough to start my camera collection with a Zenit, rebranded by Kalimar in the states. Within a year it was the start of my parts collection of springs, curtain rollers and screws. Yesterday I found the pentaprism in a junk box.

 

[2F/2F]

I suggest not collecting usable cameras. It will drive the prices up for those that actually shoot them, and will be a complete waste of the cameras' abilities. The thing about cameras is that even old ones are still extremely useful in every day shooting, and very high in quality compared to today's cameras.

 

[narsuitus]

I am primarily a camera user – not a collector. Therefore, I am unable to answer your question. However, for photo classes that I teach, I have accumulated the following small collection of mostly non-functional cameras that I use to demonstrate the variety that is available.

Large format
Medium format
Small format
Box camera
Folding camera
Film camera
Digital camera
SLR
TLR
Rangefinder
View camera
Fixed lens camera
Interchangeable lens camera
Still camera
Movie camera
Eye level camera
Waist level camera
Roll film camera
Sheet film camera
Cartridge loading camera
Miscellaneous cameras such as Aerial, Underwater, Stereo, Instant, Disposable, Pinhole, Panoramic, Cell phone

 

[baachitraka]

Any camera which is metalic and mechanical...

 

[OddE]

Myself, I collect various Nikon F-series cameras (Yeah, I know - not very original!) - and I definitely have more cameras than I /need/. However, I try to use them all on a semi-regular basis.

Why Nikon F?

• Just about any F-mount lens you can find will work (to some degree) on any F-mount camera, thus making the collection very flexible from a user perspective.
• There's a huge advantage in numbers; F cameras are all over the 'bay, and you can find all categories of a specific model - mint, user, parts - at any given time. (Excluding various limited editions, of course.)
• The vast numbers they've been made in has another advantage: Prices are very reasonable (This, of course, can be said of a number of cameras from a range of manufacturers.)
• For the most part, they are indestructible, thus excellent users. (This, of course... etc.)
• There's something for everyone; plain, rock solid users - or exotic special editions. How about a gold-plated F2, for instance?

As always, your mileage may vary, and as others have said, it really depends a lot on what focus you'd like on your collection.

Myself, I find that most of the fun is in using the cameras for their intended purpose - and thus, rather than shelling out for mint-ish specimens, I try to find good users with lots of life left in them, the odd scratch or ding notwithstanding.

There's a lot of fun to be had (To me, anyway) by starting off a week shooting an F (metered or not, you decide!), then progressing to an F2, F2AS, F3... Etc, etc, just appreciating the improvements Nikon engineers saw fit to introduce as the series bore on. Within a few days, you can cover six decades of camera technology! Nerdvana!

 

[fstop]

I suggest not collecting usable cameras. It will drive the prices up for those that actually shoot them, and will be a complete waste of the cameras' abilities. The thing about cameras is that even old ones are still extremely useful in every day shooting, and very high in quality compared to today's cameras.

So we're supposed to collect junk and inops? I insist on having everything in my collection be functional, thats why I have parts cameras. If the opportunity comes along to buy up, IE: get a better condition camera or working, I will buy it and turn out the non functional/lower condition rated unit.
So I buy functional and non functional cameras.
I also have my area of special interest and buy any example of which that comes at a decent price. If this drives up the price in the market, then so be it.
Right now F's with any finder except the eye level are going for stupid low prices.If I like the condition and the price I buy it thats why I have 4 or 5 of them now, I lost track...
When its a buyers market you can count on speculators to enter and drive up the prices, its been done with real estate,precious metals,stocks etc.

Been around long enough to kick myself for not buying that used Shelby GT350 or the Benz 300 SL gull wing or the 57 T-bird for or the 67 big block Sting Ray convertible when they turned up for $2000-$3000.
Not making those mistakes again.
:munch:

 

[Someonenameddavid]

I use everyone of them regularly - I do my part in keeping film alive, but I also would like to have a historical perspective on it. When I see such varying designs juxtaposed, it always has me wondering what were the thought process involved at that time . . .

Also, it is much better to have them in my possession then sitting unused or worst!

And the point of collectors studying what they collect is adequately illustrated in your "1955 Leica Luftwaffe" which is either a Fed or Zorki which has had the chrome stripped and engravings intended to deceive made on the bare metal. These things were made with Western consumers (= 'suckers') in mind and have been sold for outrageous sums of money.
Anyone who sees a "Reichsadler" on a camera... caveat emptor

David

 

[fstop]

I have yet to find anyone attempting to counterfeit mid 70s SLRs, the issue with RF cameras is well known.Don't know why items associated with a heretic regime have any value to begin with.

 

[Someonenameddavid]

well I blame the Leica fondlers who pay outrageous sums for "Luftwaffen Eigentum" and IIIcK and red shutter curtains (made by Graflex in the US just before the war) Ernst Leitz and co were not Nazis and worked to protect their Jewish employees and families from the Nazis... That should be remembered, not the state-run industry.

David

 

[fstop]

well I blame the Leica fondlers who pay outrageous sums for "Luftwaffen Eigentum" and IIIcK and red shutter curtains (made by Graflex in the US just before the war) Ernst Leitz and co were not Nazis and worked to protect their Jewish employees and families from the Nazis... That should be remembered, not the state-run industry.

David

Good point.

 

[Les Sarile]

And the point of collectors studying what they collect is adequately illustrated in your "1955 Leica Luftwaffe" which is either a Fed or Zorki which has had the chrome stripped and engravings intended to deceive made on the bare metal. These things were made with Western consumers (= 'suckers') in mind and have been sold for outrageous sums of money.David

It is funny how many who see that mistake it as my most expensive piece . . .

Really that trio was to show the state of 35mm back then and how groundbreaking the original Asahi Pentax was by comparison.

 

[Bill Burk]

So we're supposed to collect junk and inops? I insist on having everything in my collection be functional, thats why I have parts cameras.

Wonderful thing about inops... Very often they have "one" broken part, and the very core of the camera, all the gears which predict a long, serviceable future, are as good as new.

 

[Discoman]

How about an srt 101? Made by Minolta, I have one, and it's gotta be the easiest to use and simolest 35mm camera with a meter I have ever encountered. Apart from Ines that can auto set everything, this is as easy as a manual camera gets.
And they are plentiful and pretty cheap.
Now, if you want, I could sell you an xg7, also from Minolta. I wouldn't mind parting with it-mine has already roasted the electronics once, and at over $100 to replace at that time, and it seeming ti have done so again, I would rather sell it to someone collecting stuff that will never use it instead of it being broken and taking up storage space that I could put something else that works. Cosmetically, its great. Functionally, it is not only broken, but was the absolute worst metering exposure system to deal with. Forget setting shutter and aperture manually-just leave it in auto.
Seriously though, collect stuff you like and will use. What is the point of an object, valuable or not, that will never see use, not because it is obsolete, but because it's in a collection? Just buy ten cameras you enjoy using.

 

[Pumalite]

I would go for price and functionality.
Nikon: F. F2. F2AS. F3 F4. FE, FM, F100, FM3A, F90X
Minolta: XD-11, SRT-101
Leica: IIIf, M3
Contax: IIa
Olympus: OM-1, OM-1n, OM-2, OM-2n, OM-4Ti, Epic
Hasselblad 500 CM
Mamiya RB6X7 Pro S
Mamiya 645
Bronica: EC, EC-TL, SQ-Ai
Canon: F-1, New F-1, A-1, EF
Yashica: Electro 35 CSN, MG-1, FX-3, Lynx 14e