PhotoCamel - Your Friendly Photography Forum

PhotoCamel - Your Friendly Photography Forum (https://photocamel.com/forum/)
-   Photography Talk (https://photocamel.com/forum/photography-talk/)
-   -   In the 1960's you could get a free mirrorless camera (https://photocamel.com/forum/photography-talk/231174-1960s-you-could-get-free-mirrorless-camera.html)

Didereaux 07-21-2017 05:30 PM

In the 1960's you could get a free mirrorless camera
 
Back in the 60's when the first good reliable SLR's came out you could literally go to trash baskets and pull out range finder cameras aka mirrorless now. They were inferior to SLR then, they are inferior to DSLR now. Just shiny new toys for the uninformed. However, I do support their sales because without the dumb money paying the tab the camera companies won't be doing much in the research dept at the high end! SO ....encourage the purchase of mirrolress! Get the T-shirt!
:afro::afro:[popcorn]:afro::afro:

heaterguy 07-21-2017 08:45 PM

Re: In the 1960's you could get a free mirrorless camera
 
So, a Leica Range Finder Camera was not a good camera and neither would it's modern Mirrorless? I've got a mirrorless and it does 95% of what my Nikon DSLR did. In the words of the great Harvey Pennick, Univ. of Texas greatest golf coach: "It's not the fiddle its the fiddler"!

Mr. Pickles 07-21-2017 08:56 PM

Re: In the 1960's you could get a free mirrorless camera
 
Pretty bold statement that mirrorless is inferior, and wonder what you are comparing to what.

Didereaux 07-22-2017 04:35 AM

Re: In the 1960's you could get a free mirrorless camera
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Pickles (Post 2360902)
Pretty bold statement that mirrorless is inferior, and wonder what you are comparing to what.


I am stating historical fact! The professional photographers at the time who were using 35mm simply tossed the range finders aside when reliable SLR's came out. The fact is that most of the people oday aren't old enough to remember those things and in their ignorance somehow ignore it when shown. They believe the new 'mirrorless' is some new advancement in technology and it simply isn't true. (and yes I am old enough to have witnessed all of that) If you wish to argue that range finders were a equal or superior of SLR's then I suggest you locate some of NATGEO, LIFE, LOOK, and other professionals who lived then...there must still be one or two alive.
By early 70's the venerable Nikon F2 had finished off the range finder other than for use by some older artists (think Bresson et al), and Canon had the A1 picking up the leftovers. The New York Times REQUIRED all their staff photographers to use F2's....does that sound like the SLR was in second place?

This is the point of my posting this, I am not trolling, I am trying to get people to remove some of their ignorance about the history of cameras and photography... read historical accounts and not mfr press releases and moronic babbblings of the lemmings-of-all-things-shiny.

Jim Jones 07-22-2017 08:43 AM

Re: In the 1960's you could get a free mirrorless camera
 
Many great photographers never even touched a SLR, digital or film. How about Matthew Brady, Timothy O'Sullivan, Carleton Watkins, Eadweard Muybridge, or William Henry Jackson. Jackson did live into the SLR era, but apparently chose a Leica instead of an Exacta. Cartier Bresson could have chosen a SLR, but logically used a Leica RF. The Graflex 4x5 and 5x7 satisfied a niche, but few people chose to use such monsters. I'm familiar with both SLRs and rangefinders, having bought my first Leica in 1953 and first Nikon SLR a few years later. The Leica has always been my preferred camera except for long lenses or macro photography. The main reason for my using a DSLR now is giving away thousands of pro bono images to schools and friends instead of making dozens of prints.

heaterguy 07-22-2017 11:55 AM

Re: In the 1960's you could get a free mirrorless camera
 
This is the point of my posting this, I am not trolling, I am trying to get people to remove some of their ignorance about the history of cameras and photography... read historical accounts and not mfr press releases and moronic babbblings of the lemmings-of-all-things-shiny.

A little vituperative don't you think?

Didereaux 07-22-2017 12:15 PM

Re: In the 1960's you could get a free mirrorless camera
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim Jones (Post 2360956)
Many great photographers never even touched a SLR, digital or film. How about Matthew Brady, Timothy O'Sullivan, Carleton Watkins, Eadweard Muybridge, or William Henry Jackson. Jackson did live into the SLR era, but apparently chose a Leica instead of an Exacta. Cartier Bresson could have chosen a SLR, but logically used a Leica RF. The Graflex 4x5 and 5x7 satisfied a niche, but few people chose to use such monsters. I'm familiar with both SLRs and rangefinders, having bought my first Leica in 1953 and first Nikon SLR a few years later. The Leica has always been my preferred camera except for long lenses or macro photography. The main reason for my using a DSLR now is giving away thousands of pro bono images to schools and friends instead of making dozens of prints.


LOL SOme of those were kinda dead by the time the 35 SLR came about!:D

scoundrel1728 07-22-2017 12:22 PM

Re: In the 1960's you could get a free mirrorless camera
 
Dideraux, you might find a thread I started in 2005 on rethinking SLR design informative and interesting. Now, if the camera manufacturers would bring back some of the old SLR viewfinder features...

I am not overly enamored with novelty and am still using that Canon 40D that I bought in 2010, though it is beginning so show its age.

Didereaux 07-22-2017 12:30 PM

Re: In the 1960's you could get a free mirrorless camera
 
Okay, the bottom line is that the SLR supplanted the Range Finder because of its versatility! Think about that! ...and today's DSLR's also are more versatile than the 'mirrorless! Can the range finder/mirrorless take just as good a picture? Sometimes...when it is done within the range of its capabilities. As a nice street camera for the amateurs(which the camera mfr is aiming at) it is a fine camera. Just as even the old Argus Brick was a better camera than the Brownie. But neither were the best, nor very versatile. As has been pointed out the new mirrorless suffers the same short falls as the old Leicas...they were no good for wildlife and action stuff...if they were then mainstream pros working in those genres would be using them. Also how many studio people ever shot with range finders? How many began to shoot 35mm when the SLR came out? You see it's the shortcomings of the lack of being able to focus through the lens that killed the range finder for most purposes. And for the record my first 35mm was an old Argus Brick, and I liked it a lot. It was all I could afford, but just because I didn't have a new F1 didn't make me disparage them nor claim that mine was just as good or better.

ShutterKlick 07-22-2017 01:47 PM

Re: In the 1960's you could get a free mirrorless camera
 
An accomplished photographer I was blessed to be the assistant to told me "Dont judge a carpenter by his hammer", he had top end gear and I mentioned I had a lowly 5300, he said "Thats a good camera!", then the wisdom came.

We also cannot judge mirrorless technology from 1960 to mirroless technology of 2017. Mirrorless means only one thing... mirror-less. It does not refer to the body, the lens or the sensor/film used. I surmise the OP statement should be regarded as ramblings.

Andrew


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:32 AM.