Or maybe people just have affinities for certain cameras, and less so with others?
After a fun filled weekend shooting my ancient, almost-50 years old Fed 2D (or 2E, depending on which resource page you believe), I started thinking about why I like it so much. If you compare its features to my modern Voigtlander Bessa R, you would think that the Bessa R would be much more pleasurable to use.
The Fed has a tiny viewfinder eyepiece. The view through the finder is small, and there are no framelines, it shows only the 50mm view, and is not parallax compensated. It has a knob for film winding, and is built like a Russian tractor, rough but serviceable (not that I really know how Russian tractors are built). It's I-26M 50mm lens has clean glass, but the non-click stopped aperture ring is sloppy, and the focus helicals are stiff from coagulated grease that is probably as old as the camera.
The Bessa R, on the other hand, is a thoroughly modernized version of a classic RF camera. It has built in framelines for a number of focal lengths. Its viewfinder is large and bright. It has a built-in lightmeter. While the body is plastic, its feels is decent, and build quality is decent. It also sports a real film advance lever, a hinged back, and a rewind crank (vs. the small rewind knob on the Fed).
For some reason, I "connect" more with the Fed than the Bessa despite all of the Fed's shortcomings that I listed above. Maybe in time, I will, but as of now, I have not warmed up to the Bessa even though it is perfectly competent as a camera.
For me, part of my enjoyment of photography, besides making nice pictures, is using and owning equipment that I like. Cameras that look good, and feel good in the hand are important.
The Fed, and to a slightly lesser extent, my Zorki-4, give me a great deal of shooting pleasure. Maybe part of the reason is because they are so simple and direct that it brings photography back to its simple, fundamental elements. There is no need to worry about white balance, exposure displays, motor drives, focus points, histograms, blown highlights, battery levels, etc...
All you have is a compact box to hold the film, with a decent lens, from which you can adjust the 3 variables that really matter, focus, shutter speed, and aperture, and beyond that, just concentrate on the scene at hand, and how to capture it best with what you have.
Your thoughts?
--Warren
Photos:
Now that Gail is armed and dangerous with her Sony DSC-P72, we're going to see more pictures like this one of me taking a picture of Clarissa with my Fed 2D in Chinatown:

Here's the shot: (Fed 2D, I-26M 50mm f2.8, Kodak Max 400, Scanned from a print)
5 Comments:
Suspicious indeed!The ears in partiicular say it all.Nice catch.
PAT
Cool cat! This should be in one of those cat calendars on sale each yr around Xmas. If you want to submit it, I can get you a couple of addresses. We have 2 cat calendars on this floor - one about regular cats and one for the BAD CATS. This belongs in BAD CATS with a funny caption.
Posting this for Dolph:
Great Shot! How did you get the cat to stay in that position while went to get your camera? Looks like it got hit over the head with a pan.
--Dolph
Thanks guys.
When I first saw him, he waa lurking on the fence, and I realized that I've never seen him before. I went to get the camera and when I went outside, he was still there just peeking over the fence. I took two pictures. In the first one, his ears were still normal. As I walked closer to get a second picture, he got alarmed, and his ears assumed the funny-looking, "i'm alarmed, and I'm ready to fight or run" position. He took off after I shot the second picture.
By the way, did anyone notice that he has one green eye and one blue eye? I didn't notice until I scanned the picture into Photoshop.
--Warren
Now that you've mentioned it,one of the eyes do look a bit funny,but I can't quite make out the color still.
PAT
Post a Comment