Best vintage camera for the starting enthusiast?

[Atterbury Dodd]

I am interested in starting vintage photography soon, what would some of the more experienced FL vintage photographers suggest as far as a good vintage camera for a beginner? I think I would probably like to start with something that took standard films.

Atterbury

 

[Ray-Vigo]

I like the old German Exakta cameras from the 1930s-1950s. I have an early (1937) Kine Exakta and love it. The plus side is that they take regular roll film.

 

[Doctor Strange]

35mm is still the most popular and supported film format. It's hard to go wrong with a classic 50s-70s rangefinder or SLR. For example, there are lots of unkillable early 60s-vintage Nikon Fs out there, and they're still the same classy pro machines they always were.

 

[DerMann]

Curious, how new are you to the world of photography?

If you've only had experience with "point-n-shoot" type cameras, I would suggest getting an older cheap dSLR, on which you can learn the basics (f/stop, film speed, shutter speed, and white balance). You won't have to invest in film or time to develop bad shots.

Zeiss-Ikon made several models of very fine cameras. For example my grandfather owned a Zeiss-Ikon Contaflex IV, which is now mine, and my mother owned a simpler Zeiss-Ikon Contessa. These cameras can usually be found for an affordable price, and take a form of 35MM film.

After reading a lot about large format cameras, I now am enamoured with the Graflex Crown Graphic. I've always been obsessed with detail (usually shoot at around 16 f/stop on my dSLR), and the amount of detail large format film cameras can capture is still largely unequaled by modern large format dSLRs. But at $3 per exposure, I'm hesitant to explore this new niche of photography.

 

[vitanola]

If you want to use the 35mm format, you cannot beat the Argus C-3 rangefinder camera.

This camera was in production between 1938 and 1966. It is simple, very rugged, and takes excellent pictures despite its simplicity. It has adjustable shutter speed, focus, and f-stop, and is entirely manual, so that one can gain a feel for photography without automatic features.

This camera was fantastically popular in its day , and introduced most of the world to the 35mm format. It was probably in large measure responsible for the dominance of this format today.

The Argus C-3 cameras are still readily available at very reasonable prices. You should be able to find an excellent example for under $25.00.

 

[MrBern]

Diana

Theres an old `60s camera thats being made new & improved. It shoots 120 film, but now theres an accessory so it can also shoot standard 35mm film in multiple formats.

http://www.lomography.com/diana/products/diana-f-plus

 

[Doctor Strange]

Yeah, but the Diana was bottom-of-the-barrel dreck, even for a cheap snapshooter. I had one, it had an awful plastic Coke-bottle lens and produced drab, soft, mushy images: even its big 2-1/4 inch square negative didn't matter. It was essentially a fifty-cent camera made to give little kids, who'd shoot a roll or two and then break it.

I know, I know: there's a school of photography that thinks it's just so postmodern and cool to use crummy cameras, and that considers their flarey, soft, ghosty images to be high art. But I'm sorry, I can't go for that.

There are literally millions of great old cameras out there, and many outstanding ones can be had dirt cheap, or even for free. There's no reason to use a plastic toy like the Diana when you can find bona fide classics for peanuts.

I wrote an article about using classic cameras for Port Halcyon a few years ago (and amazingly, it's still online!):

http://www.porthalcyon.com/features/200410/cameras.shtml

 

[Atterbury Dodd]

Thanks for the info so far everybody, I have questions and more to say, but they'll have to wait until I get back from work!

 

[Mike1939]

I'm also interested in getting into vintage photography. Thanks for posting your article Doctor Strange I found it very informative and helpful.

 

[KilroyCD]

I agree 100% with Vitanola regarding the Argus C-3. They are plentiful, of good quality and reasonably priced. Plus you are able to get a number of accessories for them.

 

[Warbaby]

I give a big thumbs-up to the Argus C3, as well. My first "real" camera was a C3 and I learned a lot about photography with that clunky old box.

DerMan: The thing about those large format cameras and $3 shots is that they're a great tool to train your eye for good composition. I used to take one out for a day's shooting with 4 film holders (8 exposures). When you've only 8 shots for a whole day, you learn to make every one count. And don't forget the tripod...

 

[Jack Armstrong]

I'll second the advice about getting an Argus C3. I have collected and used vintage 35mm cameras for years, and a 1939 C3 was the first of my collection. I still use it to this day.

Other candidates would be the Kodak Signet 35 (make sure the mirror in the rangefinder hasn't gone clear, though), and the Bolsey B2. Since you're a beginner, you're probably not ready for the unique half-frame Univex Mercury II, of which I have three.

Of course a vintage Leica can't be beat, as long as it's in mechanically good shape. They're expensive, but there's a full range of lenses and accessories if you're patient and look hard enough.

Another thing you're going to want if you're using old cameras is a good light meter. The Weston Master II was the best in its day, and can usually be had for not much money. But the GE models 58 or 68 are reliable, accurate meters as well, and very common.

A bit of time with a search engine should turn up enough background information to get you started.

 

[Doctor Strange]

DerMan: The thing about those large format cameras and $3 shots is that they're a great tool to train your eye for good composition. I used to take one out for a day's shooting with 4 film holders (8 exposures). When you've only 8 shots for a whole day, you learn to make every one count. And don't forget the tripod...

I was going to say something like this too. It used to be that pre-visualization, and deciding if a picture was really worth taking, was an important component of photography. Those of us who trained in the old days have internalized this - I actually shoot very little film in my cameras, but I generally maintain a very high good-shot-to-total-exposure ratio.

But today's younger folks, who are used to having an effectively limitless number of exposures available on their digital cameras, don't understand this skill. Or the fact that capturing the defining moment is a matter of timing and placement, not how fast you can shoot in burst mode or how much you can zoom in.

It's very easy, in photographic circles, to get lost in the gadgetry and forget that it's all about your eye, and that equipment is definitely secondary. (I have gotten great pictures out of el-cheapo kids cameras, as well as many old clunkers, besides the great classic cameras.) And this is the ultimate reason to try large format if you're up to the challenge: reducing things to a tripod and groundglass forces you to peel back the technology and concentrate on the picture-taking process.

The same thing applies with old manual 35mm and rollfilm cameras - they make you slow down and think about it, and come to understand the craft.

(Standard disclaimer: I have nothing against digital cameras, zoom lenses, motor drives, etc. But I prefer a simple film camera and a prime lens.)

 

[Atterbury Dodd]

O.K., I'm back.

With all of the recomendations for the Argus C-3 that may very well be what I will try. I'll have to look around, and I'll also check out some of the other ideas.

 

[Atterbury Dodd]

Curious, how new are you to the world of photography?

I've messed around with digital, but not much with film. Only the newer film cameras that do everything for you. So yes, point and shoot is about all I've had experience with.

 

[phyllis1753]

Realities of vintage

An Argus "brick"! How that brings back memories. I first did photography with one way back in the mid-60s. It's a good camera to start with.

HOWEVER.....!
Any vintage camera will probably need maintenence. Even a camera as basic as the Argus is now at least 40 years old and it's a safe bet that any lubrication; shutter, rangefinder etc. has long since dried up making the camera stiff and hard to use. Neither is it the sort of thing you can have done at your nearest camera shop. Of course. there are repair shops around the country that specialize in vintage cameras and they charge accordingly.

I don't want to sound discouraging but I thought that a bit of reality should be mentioned here before you go off looking for one. Yes, an Argus can be bought cheap enough; i.e. in good cosmetic condition, but expect to spend some money to have the thing brought back to proper mechanical condition.

Good Luck!

 

[vitanola]

I lubricate my own. not that difficult. A high-quality watch oil and a fine hypodermic needle in a syringe. Common insulin syringes are perfect!

 

[phyllis1753]

OK. If you know what you're doing have at it!

Cheers

 

[vitanola]

You know, the Argus C-3 is so common that it might be advisable for a novice to purchase two examples, a clean original, and a corroded, damaged, or otherwise non-working unit. Take the imperfect camera apart, and get a feeling for its construction and mechanism. Armed with the knowledge gained form the sacrificial unit, the tyro can then properly clean and lubricate his "keeper".


There are always quite a number for sale on the 'bay.

The basic black C-3 is my favorite, as I like its looks:

The Matchmatic (introdced in 1958) is nice, as it has a built-in lightmeter:

Here is a site with cleaning, lubrication and adjustment tips for this excellent camera:

http://rick_oleson.tripod.com/index-86.html

 

[The Reno Kid]

I've got a different take...

If you really want to do golden age photography, get an old Kodak folding pocket camera or a brownie. I have a No.1 folding camera that was made in 1927 (if memory serves) and it works beautifully. It takes 120 film, which is still pretty widely available. You probably won't find it at Walmart but any good camera store will carry it--and probably process it too. If you want to process it yourself, it's easy. My camera produces 4x5 negatives, so I don't even need an enlarger. You can just make contact prints and they are already a useable size.

One word of warning: Make sure you check the film size. A lot of these old camera use 620 film. It's the same size as 120 but wound on a smaller spool. You can use it but you would have to re-wind the film onto 620 spools. Also, if you are looking at a folding camera, make sure you check the bellows for tears or pinholes. These are a deal breaker.

Cameras that use 120 film were manufactured and used throughout the golden era. They're a lot of fun and worth the trouble to go to a camera store for the film.