First photo memory: My father brought home a cheesy GAF when I was about 9.
I thought that fake chrome was unbeliveably beautiful and somehow I thought
it was for ME but it a family camera so I was a frustrated collector from
the beginning, I suppose.
I saved up paper route pennies to go to the Tetons and Yellowstone but had
to scrimp on a new camera for the trip. I bought and carefully composed the
square 126 Kodak with the battery-less Magicubes. It wasn't very sharp but
it "set the hook" as the fisherman say.
I started saving and found immediately that if I purchased used equipment, I
could buy a body, 50 and a 135 tele quite reasonably. It was a Miranda
Sensorex, sporting a removable pentaprism (so I wasted money on the dark
waist-level viewer. I didn't use it much because the first time I mounted
it, (even before I made an exposure), I noticed that the match needle
responded to the degree of shadow I provide with my hand!) The Sensorex had
a working meter and coupled correctly for awhile with the auto diaphrams in
both lenses. The shutter release was on the front of the body, so you
squeezed the body with the index finger of the right hand. It worked great.
I thought it was a big, heavy beast but that was before I tried the
Nikkormat.
The Miranda lenses all started to break down so I started thinking about a
new camera. I was reading and re-reading and re-reading Popular Photography
and Modern Photography. I loved the disassembly articles by Norman Goldberg
and the monthly SLR article by Herbert Keppler. I was in no hurry.
In back issues, I discovered that the plain mechanical Nikkormat (not the
later EL) seemed ideal as a way to get into high quality lenses and an
sturdy but affordable body. My hopes were way high when I walked into the
camera store and asked to have a look. It was disappointed that it was as
heavy as the Sensorex but decided to check out the meter anyway. Has anyone
ever used a Nikkormat meter? The needle is centered to indicate correct
exposure but it swings UP TO INDICATE UNDEREXPOSURE AND DOWN TO INDICATE
OVEREXPOSURE!! I couldn't believe it! I was as judgemental then as I am
now and handed it right back to the salesman! Got on my bike and rode home,
determined to find a better mousetrap.
I never tried a Canon FTb but it was on my short list, along with the
Minolta SR-T101. I probably would have been happy with any of them but
didn't have the money just yet.
Then Norman Goldberg wrote an incredibly, incredibly glowing review of the
Olympus OM-1. (As I recall, the name had already been altered by the time
of the review.) He praised the optics. He meditated on the shock absorber
for the mirror, he praised the oversized mirror, he marveled at the size,
the quietness, the ease of carrying. He talked about the Olypus OM-1 as a
breakthough design. He said that Olympus had shown the way all advanced
ameteaur SLRs would be built from then on.
How many times did I read that review? When it was first introduced, the
OM-1 was priced way above the Pentax Spotmatic, the Minolta SR-T101, 201,
and the Canon FTb. Then I received my birthday present:
"The Last Whole Earth Catalog"
They had articles on composting, on writing, on a brand new invention called
a transportable computer, and on buying stuff mailorder from Hong Kong and
gold watches from Hong Kong.
So I bought a gold Seiko, a Velbon tripod, an OM-1 with everready case, 50mm
f/1.8, and the infamous dedicated clamp-on hood. I loaded it up with
Kodachrome 64 (for the SPEED!) and never looked back.
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|