Starting with a Brownie Hawkeye some time before my tenth year and progressing through an Argus or two and a Petri, I found myself in 1968 about to undertake monthly trips to Europe for a few years. I thought an slr with a lens or two (decided on a 28mm and 135 mm (with a 2x TC) which I still use) would be great to record these adventures. After reviewing the field that I could afford, I was finally swayed by the Honeywell name to purchase a Spotmatic (?). This camera served me well until it was stolen in Sydney in '74. A few days later while in Melbourne I picked up a Spotmatic F which worked flawlessly until 2000. A CLA here in the New York area -- Iwas quite surprised at the good service on such an old camera -- and it continues to work just fine. At that time, I decided to "back up" the F and picked up a mint ES II (with 50mm f1.4 SMCT) and right after that a mint 100 mm SMCT macro, a macro flash, and a mint SMCT 300mm --- items I'd always wanted but figured I'd never find. That is until I "discovered" e-bay. That was the end of that wish list. Well maybe a 24mm SMCT ..............
Then after all the digital static on this channel, I decided to give that technology a try. I laid out my requirement and then put together a 3MP N*k*n digital camera system, which has turned out to be a great learning experience , that is more than adequate for my work -- using an external flash, otherwise not.. However, the Spotmatic F and ES II still travel with me for special situations and are used quite a lot during leisure travel. Until I moved back to NJ in '85, all my film was slides. After than 25% slides, with the photos being for work and the families photo collection. For the future, I'll probably pick up an MZ-S (starting to need the AE and AF a little more now) and another digital -- for back up of course. Can't see beyond that. Mike Ignatiev wrote: > Because one rarely hears "my dad left me his Leica M6 (Contax/Hasselblad/...), and >that's what I am still using " :) > Seriously, it's much more interesting to hear why people made a *conscious* decision >to use one or another kind of > equipment (as oposed to having inherited it). > But I was wrong in my initial judgement -- seems like lots of people here did make >that choice, and I saw some very > good reasons. > > Now if only someone from Pentax marketing were listening... > > Best, > Mishka > > -----Original Message----- > From: "Steve Desjardins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Mon, 09 Sep 2002 13:26:50 -0400 > Subject: Re: Orgin Myths > > > > > Why is this depressing? The four main 35 mm SLR makers all make good > > equipment, and people tend to stay with what they are used to. I find > > it hard to believe that many people would systematically try all four > > majors brands (plus maybe Contax, etc.) to actually make a decision. If > > someone actually gave me equipment, I'd be a Nikon or Canon user. The > > idea that Pentax is so obviously better that anyone that doesn't use > > one is either wicked or stupid just doesn't hold up. This also applies > > to Nikon and Canon. Most of their dominance is due to marketing, > > promotions, and making sure the right people were happy. > > > > > > Steven Desjardins > > Department of Chemistry > > Washington and Lee University > > Lexington, VA 24450 > > (540) 458-8873 > > FAX: (540) 458-8878 > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > >
