Superlatives have long since attained mediocrity status. Little or no need for the word anymore, in fact!
When one has a group of 4 increasing larger, let's say coffee, containers and the smallest of the group is called "Giant," well, all comparison is lost, isn't it.
Being a "Classic" implies something. The precise definition is subject to discussion, but I'd think universally it would mean older, well-respected, capable, very popular in it's time, no longer manufactured, and was superceded by many who tried to emulate it's success, but in the end most failed to measure up. All of which leed to an increased appreciation for the article in question.
Vintage is a good companion word.
My thesaurus says classic is "serving as a standard of excellence," or "being of old, recognized, and enduring interest, importance, or quality."
Amateur Photographer is really pushing it!
There ARE no classic digital cameras yet, even if one or two potentially exist...of which I harbor doubt... <g>
keith whaley
Malcolm Smith wrote:
When I think of the word 'classic' in connection with cameras, I immediately think of anything M42 or perhaps K2s & other early bayonette fitting equipment. I was quite surprised in the 16.10.04 edition of Amateur Photographer for an advert (pg5 for those interested) promoting their own classified section to see a Canon D60 referred to as a classic digital camera. They've only been out a few minutes in camera years! Should I look forward to new classic in a box status, when buying a digital SLR? It's taken film cameras years to be classics, but at this rate, my *ist D will be one by, er, next year.
Malcolm
