Classic digital cameras?

[Vidar]

There are alot of great classic cameras around. But all these are film cameras.. So my question is: is it possible to see some digital cameras as classics?

A digital camera is "old" after 6 months.. Are all digital cameras disposable?

My E-P1 kinda looks like a classic camera, but will probably not work anymore in 10 years time?

 

[Brian S]

I would say some are interesting pieces of Technology, and showed some real innovation. But classic- don't know about that.

Full-Frame Nikon E3, used Reduction Optics (relay lens) to squeeze the full-frame image to a 2/3" CCD. 1.3MPixels. $7K in 1998.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[Brian S]

Kodak DCS200ir.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

1.6MPixels, 1992. Well over $10K. Built in 80MByte SCSI drive, stores (yes, still works) 50 images.

No LCD Screens on these puppies.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[Brian S]

Classic? Judgement will be in about 10 years.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

The lens on it is. 1941 CZJ Sonnar 5cm F2 "T".

 

[Vidar]

Interesting cameras Brian.

The M8 sure looks like a classic! (aaah I still want one!). 10k for that Kodak thing? Wow... Looks like you spent some money on cameras!

I guess the thing I hate is that things like digital cameras and mobil phones is that they on purpose are built only to last a few years, that way they can sell new models after a short time....

 

[OzRay]

I reckon this will always be a classic:

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Cheers

Ray

 

[BillN]

Design classic?

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[grebeman]

I second OzRays choice, but then I've got one and despite the plethora of poor reviews I reckon it produces some excellent images and hey, is the viewfinder as poor as they said, no it's not. And carefully composed so that cropping is kept to a minimum excellent A4 prints can be produced.
Barrie

 

[BillN]

will it be batteries that will be the future problem just as with some film rangefinders

 

[OzRay]

I second OzRays choice, but then I've got one and despite the plethora of poor reviews I reckon it produces some excellent images and hey, is the viewfinder as poor as they said, no it's not. And carefully composed so that cropping is kept to a minimum excellent A4 prints can be produced.
Barrie

I've got 17"x22" prints at work and people just can't believe thay've been taken with a mere 5MP camera.

Cheers

Ray

 

[mabelsound]

Epson R-D1 probably qualifies. The Fujifilm F30? That is still a stellar compact. The DMC-L1/Digilux 3 remains unlike any other digicam...that will probably be considered a classic. The Sigma DP cameras will certainly be considered classics someday, especially if Foveon continues to languish in its development.

I think that, since we've come to the point where the resolution on ALL cameras has more or less come to equal that of 35mm film, everything from here on in that is unusual, beautifully made, or coveted by people who used to be film camera nerds will be in the running as future user classics. Obscure memory card formats will eventually be the equivalent of, say, cartridges you have to load yourself, a la the Robot 1. Stuff that still works in 25 years could be quite prized.

 

[ahuyevshi]

The original Canon 1D is surely a classic... You can't find a better camera almost 10 years later that shoots JPG as good as this one did...

 

[Brian S]

> Stuff that still works in 25 years could be quite prized.

Eight more years to go for the DCS200ir. It is older than the DCS460 in the Smithsonian. Have not put the spare drive in it. It uses "AA" batteries. 10 of them, same as a Nikon MD2+MB-1 Motor drive for the F2.

 

[Rich M]

My favorite digicam (that will NOT be around in 10 years) is the Sony DSC-F717.

Carl Zeiss optics...14 bit A/D conversion......live histogram....the incredible swivel body.....EVF.....infrared (night vision).

The 17X22's I have of the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel, still knock peoples socks off. I think it is the best "dark church" camera of all times.

Weighs 1.5 lbs....:smile:

R

 

[LisaO]

I would say the original Canon 5D. For it's time it was way ahead of everything else.It broke the glass ceiling of affordability and image quality.

 

[grebeman]

I've got 17"x22" prints at work and people just can't believe thay've been taken with a mere 5MP camera.

Cheers

Ray

Sadly I don't have access to an A3 printer to prove the point , but good to hear.

Can I also put in a plea for the Olympus E 10 of which I have a secondhand example, ok small sensor but an f2 lenses throughout the 4x zoom range, rather heavy but using AA batteries and who knows in the future, room for someone with enterprise to produce external battery packs with suitable connectors to keep these old marvels going.

Barrie

 

[babaimage]

My 1st digital camera is a Sony Mavica which used a 3.5" disk to store images, the same one use widely on desktop computer at that time.

 

[Brian Mosley]

It's threads like this which make me want to keep everything... I only buy classics, so regret selling my D1, FX01, E-1... but I'm keeping the rest!

Cheers

Brian

 

[yiddishyak]

I would have to say the Digilux 2/Lumix LC1. Both cameras represent a perfect marriage between sensor and lens, despite the fact that one is limited to the 28-90mm lens fixed on the cameras. Also, for merely 5 megapixels, these cameras blow out the competition at higher pixel counts, certainly comparing favorably to the Canon 20D (which I have and like). Just something magic about the combination that Panasonic/Leica got just right---and on a 2/3 sensor too!

 

[camerhoon]

i second the f717 from sony. When I look back at my pictures they are often the ones that draw my attention.