[Ed Shapiro]

A few points to ponder- thank you!

The Checker- In those days people did not really care about gas mileage- gas was cheap and people purchased cars the size of yachts and what with the popurlarity vans and SUVs many people, nowadays, still do. Just the other day a saw a little old lady behind the wheel of a Hummer. In the days of the checker, I drove a Peugeot 404- it looked like an undernourished 55 Chevrolet, was fuel efficient and that rack and pinion steering was to die for in New York City what with all the parking difficulties, that is, if you didn't die from the toxic air or get killed by the muggers. People laughed at my car- it was kinda funky. Back in the 60s air pollution was not a big issue with most people and even when catalytic converters came out, people took pride in removing them in the interest of gas mileage even though it was illegal. Go figure- Ralph is still running for president!

I do realize that all mechanical parts eventually do wear out but on the old Checker, the Chevy Red Seal engine would have set you back around $1200.- still less than a new car. A Benz diesel will go 300,000 miles but installing a replacement engine is far from cost effective and at that point the body might be gone.

The idea of the miniature format (35mm) was to reduce weight, increase mobility and enable speed of camera handling. In return for theses features, photographers put up with a smaller negative. Then came the Nikon F-tn with its’ metering head, motor drive and 100’ back it outweighed my Speedgraphic with its fabulous 4x5 negative. No problem for me, I used a 4x5 hand held camera for shooting wedding in the olden days so my forearms did resemble those of Popeye- you should have seen the calluses in my left knuckles- folks though I was into Karate- splitting cement blocks. Today, many DSLR bodies are made out of some sort of polymer mix that weight is no longer a problem and they will do a decent job unless you expose the to lots of sunlight and great or store them in a working oven.

Lower priced DSLRs- No problem. I am not a dyed in the wool gear-head although I do love my gadgets and cameras. Thig is, I have seen photographic masterpieces made with D-70 and Rebels and boring lifeless images come out of top of the line cameras. At the present time I am looking at a Hasselblad digital system because one of my specialties in food and beverage photography and I have to make images that will end up on large point of purchase posters, large bulk head transparencies for restaurant price lists, billboards and the sides of transport trailers. It would be ludicrous to carry a $50,000 rig to a wedding but 8x10 transparency film (for my food work) is becoming rare, Polaroid 8X10 for testing is gone and I have no choice but to go to a big sensor camera in order to keep my clients supplied with the kind of files the require. Necessity is the mother of spending too much money in cases like this. My wedding and event works requires prints in the 8x10 and 11x14 range and I do produce the odd 30X40 wall portrait from formal wedding images- any decent pro camera will accommodate theses requirements.

For the average shooter a high end consumer model with enable fine results as long as the photographer knows what he or she is doing. With low volume shooters, longevity is not a big issue.

Photography is always been an expensive hobby especially if one is into high end gear. I have been a professional photographer for 50 years and have accumulated a goodly inventory of equipment but I know rank amateurs who own more expensive state of the art gear than I do. Everyone has his or her own spending priorities and their own budgets. If some people have unlimited funds and are independently wealthy the can buy whatever they want and who says God has all that much money?

Ed