Camera/Gear Collectors Forum?

[Rafael Garcia]

Brian, I am not upset at all. The deleted response was very similar to RandyH's above, making fun of all the expensive name-dropping, and I decided that was definitely impolite for a newbie like me to do. I'll tell you why just starting a thread does not work: I can start one and, because the screen only covers a certain number of posts, it will be quickly buried by other threads and not seen again. Most people posting are not intersted in old cameras, not owning one themselves, and the threads on their issues will quickly send my thread off-screen. A separate area allows us old camera owners to keep the current threads on-screen for a much longer time, so we can find them easily. The issue is not one of not wanting to be part of the bigger whole; as I said before, I do read through the other stuff. The issue is that smaller population of old camera owner's threads get buried off-screen, even though they may be recent, by the volume of conversations about everything else. If there are areas on philosophy and on commercial issues, why not an area for vintage equipment? Does that make sense now?

[Bill_1856]

I could certainly appreciate replacing the Lounge forum with vintage LF equipment forum (say pre-WW2). As much as I dislike the policies of the present US administration, I don't think this is any place for it -- pro or con.

[Dan Fromm]

Rafael, I now have the impression that, like many people who ask questions on bulletin boards, the question you initially asked isn't really the one to which you wanted an answer. So what are you really asking for? It sounds more and more as if what you want is a complete, easily-searched, and inexpensive book on old gear that reports on everything's good and bad qualities, has instructions for users, ... I guess something like that would be nice to have, but most of us have found ways to decide what to buy, and what not to buy, and can work out how to use our kit from hints and general principles. One of the challenges of using old gear, also one of the great satisfactions, is in figuring it out. The adage to the effect that the deity, if there is one, helps those who help themselves applies very strongly to the old junk po' folks like me use. Go help yourself.

Cheers,

Dan

[RichSBV]

I can understand Rafael's point. Dan, you should be able to also as we have graflex.org. A whole site dedicated to "vintage" equipment. If I didn't have graflex.org, I would feel orphaned too. Luckily, all my LF gear was made by graflex so I have a great resource for information. Others aren't that lucky.

I can also see problems with a separate forum. How do you differentiate between "vintage" and not? I don't consider my cameras "vintage" and my 8x10's were made in the 1930's. They work as good as any newer camera and I don't need an instruction book to use them ;-)

I think the major problem is the prevalent attitudes that permeate the big forums where if it's not made after the 1980's, worth over $x,xxx and has multiple letters following it's name, then it's not worth owning or using. how many times do we hear "it would make a good starter camera"? or "it would be okay for now until you can afford a..."? or "why not just buy xxx like I did, you won't regret it"? It makes people who use the older equipment feel like second class citizens! Except maybe for the glorified Dagors and Deardorfs I suppose. I have no idea why they became so glorified since neither was a top brand or performer when new in the 1930's through WWII.

So no big deal. Buy and use vintage equipment. Just don't talk about it unless it's on the all hallowed premier list of equipment just everyone dreams of owning...

Not being overly sorry about all that. Just a pet peeve of mine after reading all these forums for many years... I'll stick with my "vintage" equipment, be very happy about it, and really wouldn't mind seeing another forum open up for people to be able to speak freely about using and enjoying the great old stuff.

[Rafael Garcia]

Rafael, I now have the impression that, like many people who ask questions on bulletin boards, the question you initially asked isn't really the one to which you wanted an answer. So what are you really asking for? It sounds more and more as if what you want is a complete, easily-searched, and inexpensive book on old gear that reports on everything's good and bad qualities, has instructions for users, ... I guess something like that would be nice to have, but most of us have found ways to decide what to buy, and what not to buy, and can work out how to use our kit from hints and general principles. One of the challenges of using old gear, also one of the great satisfactions, is in figuring it out. The adage to the effect that the deity, if there is one, helps those who help themselves applies very strongly to the old junk po' folks like me use. Go help yourself.

Cheers,

Dan

Dan:
If you were curious enough you would find out that I have posted here on how to build a simple lensboard that adds swing and tilt to old cameras, which I have done, and how to build a vertical 4x5 enlarger using shelf brackets for support, which I also have done. Both are low-cost solutions meant to help other beginners, and both have encountered strong opposition (and stronger support thanks to many smart people here) from the guys with the expensive toys. I don't need the advice to help myself... I have been doing it for over 50 years!

I do like to share simple things with others who are interested, or to find out details like what a Newton Viewfinder is, what does it look like and if anyone has one available that I could copy (and that is just an example - I actually have found out answers to all of those in another forum, and have purchased a Newton Viewfinder for my 1903 Zeiss from a friendly photographer there). Now, I don't think you care what a Newton Viewfinder is, or are curious about what the original lens on a Universal Palmos was, or what the letters N and W on the front standard of the same camera mean, or many other questions that old camera owners have. You have no use for information like that, which causes you to dismiss the suggestion as a trick on my part, a device by someone with a 'hidden agenda'. You are watching too much TV news and analysis, my friend. All I want is what I have said: a place to go to post and find information on old cameras. As to what constituted 'old' or 'vintage', I would suggest that dates have nothing to do with it. The definition should be if it is made still or not. If not, it's needing a forum so we can discuss finding parts and getting around limitations, because no one else is supporting it.

I am happy, upon review of the posts on this thread, that a lot of people get what I am saying. I thank those because the words they have posted are almost as if right out of my mouth. It is a very simple thing, not taking away anything from the rest of the forum, and not really as important as the extent of the arguing here has been with the few who oppose it with enough fervor to keep the discussion going. I will argue with anyone 'till the end of the world, it's my nature. If you want this to go away, instead of opposing it, just ignore it.

[BrianShaw]

Most people posting are not intersted in old cameras, not owning one themselves

This is the poll I would rather see: how many on this forum use, or have interest, in vintage camera usage.

I don't totally disagree with your logic for a new folder... it's just that you and I have such similar interests yet I still can't see the advantage. I've found data/information/advise on some of my vintage equipment in the current structure even if I have to trudge through many topics I couldn't care less about. Sometimes I need to ask several times before a knowledable response is received. Sometimes I need to ask elsewhere (this isn't, as you likely know, the only camera forum on the WWW). Sometimes knowledgable information never happens. That's the challenge and frustrating fun of working in vintage equipment. I'm more of a supporter, bu the way, of Darr's idea in your poll thread -- I'd LOVE top see a vintage camera forum that deals with vintage USER camera issues of ALL formats.

Glad to hear that you are more persistant than upset!

Brian

[Dan Fromm]

Rich, I sort of take your point but I don't agree fully.

Like you I use Graphics (no Graflexes yet, and I doubt one will do for me, but a GV II might eventually) and lenses that are old, unheard-of, or both. Unlike you, I'm a compulsive lens trier-outer. Not a formal lens tester like, say Chris Perez on a good day, I just do enough to find out which of my similar lenses not to use.

What I've learned as a user and by reading others' tales of triumph and, sometimes, woe is that older cameras, pocketable folders possibly excepted, are very much alike. And LF cameras, up to and including the latest most wonderful, are all very similar. All of the users' manuals I've looked at are remarkably similar. As for older lenses, well, leaf shutters are much of a muchness. The hardest thing to learn is not to try to cock old Compounds and Compurs set to time or bulb.

As a lens trier-outer, I've learned that some old lenses are good enough to use on the emulsions I shoot from f/11 or f/16 down and others aren't. Also that the only way to tell whether the lens at hand is good enough to use is to ask it. Condition now trumps reputation when new.

That said, I recognize that if I want, say, a lens shorter than 47 mm that covers 6x9 I"ll have to save my pennies and buy a 38/5.6 SAXL or a 35/4.5 Apo Grandagon. My 38 Biogon and 1.75" Elcan won't cover, and neither will anything more ancient that I can afford to get near. Modern lenses do a few things that ancient ones flat out can't. Same goes for telephoto lenses. Modern ones are better.

But from 47 mm on to the longest I can focus there are plenty of relatively inexpensive old lenses that are better than good enough. So I don't feel shame when I use, say, my 1912 CZJ 150/6.3 Tessar. If anything, I feel a little pride in knowing good from bad and in having kit that produces good results when I perform well and that fits my budget. I suspect you have the same sensation.

Cheers,

Dan

[Rafael Garcia]

This is the poll I would rather see: how many on this forum use, or have interest, in vintage camera usage.

I don't totally disagree with your logic for a new folder... it's just that you and I have such similar interests yet I still can't see the advantage. I've found data/information/advise on some of my vintage equipment in the current structure even if I have to trudge through many topics I couldn't care less about. Sometimes I need to ask several times before a knowledable response is received. Sometimes I need to ask elsewhere (this isn't, as you likely know, the only camera forum on the WWW). Sometimes knowledgable information never happens. That's the challenge and frustrating fun of working in vintage equipment. I'm more of a supporter, bu the way, of Darr's idea in your poll thread -- I'd LOVE top see a vintage camera forum that deals with vintage USER camera issues of ALL formats.

Glad to hear that you are more persistant than upset!


Brian

At this point I'm trying harder not to make enemies than to make my point! I agree with everything you say. I have done the same. As I have said several times now, it was just a suggestion. What really became interesting to me was the aggressiveness with which some opposed the suggestion, as if I were schemeing to take something away from the Forum. I am not. I am just a newbie LF amateur, curious about the entire field, owning two old cameras which I was fortunate enough to buy cheap and in excellent condition and which I love to use. As someone past my half-century I appreciate old stuff, want to keep it working, and like sharing what I learn using it. The suggestion was innocent enough. My Baby-Boomer curiosity and ability to ponder viewpoints makes me curious as to why some are so offended by a mere suggestion, I guess. Maybe I should have dropped the entire thing a while ago, but it seems like the poll may allow us all to know where we stand better, and will certainly decide the issue in friendly terms.

PS: If you go to http://aquariumboard.com/forums/index.php , a tropical fish hobbyist forum I have visited for a while, you will see an example of the sub-forum inter-connectivity I am referring to. There the image galleries are sub-forums to the main thread topics. They share the same search parameters and the sub-forum content also shows up on the main thread content. It is not a separation of subjects, but it is a great way to organize the images so those only wanting to look at them can do so without having to go through the entire thread. I believe the engine of that forum may be the same as on this one.