ulrikft2 wrote:
Sell one of the horsemans to me lotus
Just checked, one Horseman is a VH-R, the other is an earlier 980. I'd be willing to part with the 980. I still think I will eventually use the VH-R again, but I more readily reach for the Mamiya 7 or the Silvestris instead when MF is called for. Also have a couple of those nifty rotating backs for the Horsemans...
According to 3D World, this 120 Tr-Lens Stereoscopic camera is especially useful for capturing 3 dimensional artistic photos, commercial photography display etc. 3D World’s 120 Tr-Lens Stereoscopic camera is designed with ultra-high quality of 80 million pixels picture resolution - (Film: One roll of 120reversal film for a pair of 58mm x 56mm stereo images. 6 pairs per roll). The dimension of 3D World 120 Tr-Lens camera is 8.15x 8.07 x 5.28-inch, and the camera body weighs approx. 1960g or 690oz.
Obviously, I'm a fan of hulking black SLRs, but my vote for beauty is likely to fall on something small and shiny (chrome or gold). On my shelf, the top contender is the following Leica from 1939. I don't actually need a screwmount camera, but this model got my vote for Most Beautiful Barnack, so I bought one. You have to study the historical range - roughly 1928 through 1960 - to appreciate the design of this IIIb. The structure and lines of the top deck, in particular, are gorgeous. Previous model IIIa makes a close second - sorry, you postwar fans!
Probably used the FE's more then any of my SLR's since I always had one in the car,one at work and a few at home...The FE's usually had from a 18mm to a 50mm or even a macro lens,though the FE's occasionally had a longer lens mounted.
When to EM came out...I thought they were neat...but the FG was a big improvement with more features,though not as cute and nimble as the EM...the FG-20 thought by some to be more user friendly,didn't quite have the features of the FG,but still a fun camera to use none-the-less.
I never thought of the Blads as a beautiful camera,more just a box that produced beautiful images...while the 1000,2000 and the 200 series were more versatile for work outside of the studio...the 500 series with their limited 1/500 shutter speed probably produced as many fine portraits as the much more versatile Hasselblads.
Depp wrote:
While their have been many unique cameras by different manufacturers,Franke & Heidecke/Rollei produced some of the more unique light boxes.
Gosh, I can't believe anyone uses the words beautiful and camera in the one sentence. They are all pretty much ugly, some a lot less so than others. It's like calling a WRX a pretty car. Many cameras have a functional beauty, but many are nothing but bricks with knobs and dials.
I have no choice for prettiest camera, but for ugliest modern camera at least, Nikon's D3 series is pretty putrid.
You have to study the historical range - roughly 1928 through 1960 - to appreciate the design of this IIIb. The structure and lines of the top deck, in particular, are gorgeous. Previous model IIIa makes a close second - sorry, you postwar fans!
I need a barf emoticon now. 
