What camera or lens do you wish you still had?

My first "serious" camera was a Minolta XG-9 with a 28-85 Vivitar
zoom... back when Vivitar was good... that I purchased used in 1983.
It served me well for over 15 years before the camera body went
belly-up.

I certainly enjoy what I have now, but sometimes I miss that old camera
and lens. Got some great pictures with it.

 

My Nikomat with its 50mm f/1.4 lens. It might not have been a high
end camera but it took pretty sharp photos.

Scott

 

Olympus Pen FT Outfit. In the original outfit case with three lenses.
Set it down at my feet while at a ticket counter and.... gone. I
couldn't face hunting down all the components again (in the 80's).

Technically, it probably wasn't the best camera in the world, but it
worked like I do (including the vertical 1/2 frame format) My most
satisfying images were made with it.

 

Rollei SL66

 

My Pentax ME Super, Pentax 50/1.7, and Tokina 300/5.6, all stolen (along
with many other things) several years ago. I was able to buy the Tokina for
$10 because it had a broken automatic diaphragm coupling. I took out the
remains of the coupling and used the lens in stop-down mode for sunny-day
sports photography. Really nice, especially for what I paid. I liked the ME
Super and the 50/1.7 too.

 

Canon FD 100 f2.8. I still have it; it's just that it sits in the closet
collecting dust because I never shoot film any more.

 

Where did I say I have an EOS body?

 

That's no excuse! Pick up an adapter ring on eBay and you can still use
that baby on you EOS body. Sadly I found out about the adapter rings after
I sold all my FD lenses. There's still high demand for FD lenses should you
want to sell it.







Rita

 

Yeah, I miss two cameras. I had a Nikonos III that was absolutely great
all around. I'm left handed and left eyed, and it was the best left
handed camera I've ever had.

My other was a Nikon rangefinder; I don't know what model, but it was
stamped "Made in Occupied Japan," so it was probably 20 years old when
I bought it at a drugstore cum photo-finishing/used camera store.

Eventually, they both wore out from long years of use (mine and whoever
owned them before me), but they were jewels while they lasted.
Rangefinder/ viewfinder cameras don't get the PR they deserve. C'est la
vie.

 

I wish I still had the Canon 85mm f/1.2L. Sadly, I had to return it
when the rental period expired. Hopefully, I'll stop pining for it in
a few days when my new 85 f/1.8 arrives.

As for lenses I own, I usually keep them. The only one I sent back
was a no-name 500mm mirror lens that I got from KEH for like 100
bucks. I kinda wish I still had that one even though the bokeh was
godawful and it wasn't very sharp.

 

are you folks still talking about cameras?

 

Doesn't everybody have one?





Rita

 

I really wish I had a 400/4 IS. I've got a 300/4, and ideally would
like something more like 500 mm, but I'd also like to be able to carry
it on hikes. I have the 300/4 and a great deal of luck to thank for
this photo:

http://forrestcroce.com/Photos/LesliWithHummingbirdMoth.html

But I'd like to do more with birds and other wildlife.

If I could have two, I'd also love a 24/1.4! But that's more of a
luxury; a bright viewfinder for night landscapes and cityscapes.

 

My first "serious" camera was a Nikon F3 with MD-4 motor drive and a set of
primes (20,24,28,35, 50, 105, 200). I sold the outfit when I went Nikon
autofocus, While I've been happy with my newer equipment, I often think
that if I had stayed with the MF Nikon outfit I would have saved thousands
of dollars and my photos would have been equal or better to anything I've
taken since.

Yoshi

 

"Equal or better"

I'm interested in what makes you think that. Do you think the optical quality
of the AF cameras is possibly inferior, or is it the handling and process of
the more automated devices?

 

Great, now you reminded me of mine (Sobbing...) 50, 80, and
leaf-shutter 150mm; Polaroid back, meter prism, grip, filters
(softars!) etc. All went to KEH when I needed a bigger house and was no
longer shooting professionally. THAT was an elegant lady.

 

My sentiments exactly.

I never did dump my classic MF equipment from the 70s, and I still think
that my photos are none the worse off for having remained with my reliable
stuff. It took great photos 30 years ago and it continues to do so today.

The addition of a film scanner has brought the benefits of digital editing
(Yes, I believe that the digital darkroom affords me much more precise
control over my prints than a wet darkroom ever did).

Old cameras may be useful for amateurs like me, but the unfortunate fact is
that they are difficult or impossible to repair and are unfit for use
professionally. One can't depend for his living on equipment that has seen
3 decades' of use.

But, for those of us with less-stringent requirements, there is a lot of
classic equipment available on the used market that was financially out of
reach when it was originally introduced as new. Too bad that the next
couple of generations of photographers won't know the sense of gratification
from handling and working with those classic, mostly-metal, cameras.

 

I miss my nikon fe quite a bit these days. My ft2 is dead on the
shelf and my n90s is pretty loud. I sold the fe, a 50 f/2 and a
vivitar s1 28-105 the last time I got out of photography "for good."
Of course, I had kept some things and then got back into it. Shoulda
quit cold turkey.

Take care,
des

 

primes (20,24,28,35, 50, 105, 200). I sold the outfit when I went Nikon
autofocus, While I've been happy with my newer equipment, I often think that
if I had stayed with the MF Nikon outfit I would have saved thousands of
dollars and my photos would have been equal or better to anything I've taken
since.

"Equal or better"

I'm interested in what makes you think that. Do you think the optical quality
of the AF cameras is possibly inferior, or is it the handling and process of
the more automated devices?

 

Ah, now that I had (and have) the wisdom not to sell.