Ansel Adams gear

[ignatiusjk]

Does anybody know what wappened to Ansels photo gear? I would love to have one of his lens. My post in the "photography" section shows why I'm asking. I know his negatives are at the Uni of Arizona St,but what happened to his gear?

[Kirk Gittings]

Even if they were available you would pay a huge premium for them. On the other hand I'm sure you could find copies of all his lenses that were of equal quality. Most of his famous images were made with 8x10 and utilizing emaculate technique in the field and in the darkroom, it is not all just the lenses.

[David A. Goldfarb]

And the lenses were fairly ordinary at that, like the 10" Wide-Field Ektar.

Also, shooting at small apertures as Adams often did, all lenses of even modest quality are nearly equivalent in terms of resolution.

One thing Adams did, though, was to know the area where he was photographing very well and to revisit locations under various lighting conditions to produce many of the photographs that are iconic today. At the same time he was ready to produce a usable negative under fleeting lighting conditions, as he did with "Moonrise," and had the darkroom skills to make a great print even when the negative was far from perfect.

[Bill_1856]

There ain't no magic bullet (see my answer to your other post).

[Deane Johnson]

I would suspect that even our worst photo gear today is far better than most of what was available at the time Ansel made his greatest images. It's more about vision and technique than it is about equipment.

In reading your other post, I suspect what you are seeing in his prints that you like is the fact that most were large negatives. The other thing may be that they were very well focused. He knew how to use a view camera. He knew what he could expect from a lens and how to get the most from each step of the process of making the photograph.

[Walter Calahan]

If you can find a Cooke XV lens (not the new XVa), you'll have one of his lenses.

One recently sold on eBay. Don't remember the exact price, but it was under 2 grand.

Photographs are made with the mind, not gear.

[John Kasaian]

I recollect that his Hassy gear was auctioned off for charity a few years back. I think Don Imus bid on it but I don't know if he actually won it.

I recall seeing a view camera at the Ansel Adams Gallery when it was located on Cannery Row in Montery---whether it was one of AA's or not I don't remember.

In The Making of Forty Photographs Adams reveals a great deal of info about the equipmet he used.

I have a 10" WF Ektar which was an Adam's "fave" and FWIW it is a fine lens but it the most important ingredient in the recipe for making Ansel Adams photographs is....Ansel Adams!

Beware!
Just having a lens like Adams used is a double edged sword: It is kind of an ego boost to be using the same type gear but all the while humbly reminding me of the truth that it is after all the photographer, not the gear that makes a photograph.

If a Turner Reich Triple Convertable could make your photographs come out looking like Edward Weston took 'em they'd probably be worth a lot more than what you can routinely find 'em for on ebay

[lee\c]

Imus says he won it and took possession of it.

lee\c

[Bill_4606]

Try dropping John Sexton a line. He might have some insight...

Bill Riley

[lenser]

While it would be wonderful to own an Adams lens or camera just to celebrate his life, a Swiss architect said it quite well: "It's not the camera, it's the eye." --Justus Dahinden