Nikon SP
 

My local auction house had an auction a week ago with 40 camera lots
among the 400 or so at the auction, and most were junk or trivial, but
the highlight (for me) was a pristine Nikon SP camera body (1962,
titanium shutter). I really hoped against hope that no one else knew
what it was, but that was too much to hope for. I went as high as $260
which is a pittance for that camera, and it sold for only $560, which I
consider a bargain. It would have cost me another $200 or so for the
50mm lens. Still a bargain, and probably could flip it for about
double, but a very expensive camera to play around with as gorgeous as
it is and as good as it is. But I really would have liked it for the
amount that I bid.
--
Michael

Nikon SP
 

On Tue, 28 Jan 2014 00:13:08 -0500, Michael wrote:
: My local auction house had an auction a week ago with 40 camera lots
: among the 400 or so at the auction, and most were junk or trivial, but
: the highlight (for me) was a pristine Nikon SP camera body (1962,
: titanium shutter). I really hoped against hope that no one else knew
: what it was, but that was too much to hope for. I went as high as $260
: which is a pittance for that camera, and it sold for only $560, which I
: consider a bargain. It would have cost me another $200 or so for the
: 50mm lens. Still a bargain, and probably could flip it for about
: double, but a very expensive camera to play around with as gorgeous as
: it is and as good as it is. But I really would have liked it for the
: amount that I bid.

Damn! I once had an SP, which I traded in (with its three lenses) on an F-2. I
guess I should have kept it.

Bob

Nikon SP
 

On 2014-02-01 02:45:58 +0000, Robert Coe said:

On Tue, 28 Jan 2014 00:13:08 -0500, Michael wrote:
: My local auction house had an auction a week ago with 40 camera lots
: among the 400 or so at the auction, and most were junk or trivial, but
: the highlight (for me) was a pristine Nikon SP camera body (1962,
: titanium shutter). I really hoped against hope that no one else knew
: what it was, but that was too much to hope for. I went as high as $260
: which is a pittance for that camera, and it sold for only $560, which I
: consider a bargain. It would have cost me another $200 or so for the
: 50mm lens. Still a bargain, and probably could flip it for about
: double, but a very expensive camera to play around with as gorgeous as
: it is and as good as it is. But I really would have liked it for the
: amount that I bid.

Damn! I once had an SP, which I traded in (with its three lenses) on an F-2. I
guess I should have kept it.

Bob

Short of buying a brand new F6 ($2449 new from B&H, body only) the S1
from 1962 will bring in more than any model of the F. I know, I've had
two F's, one in its day with the Photomic FTN finder, and one a few
years ago with the plain prism (the old FTN photomics don't work
anymore). I sold the first to buy my Pentax 6x7 system which I still
have and use, and I sold the second one some months ago to KEH when
they came to my town. The S2 really does look and feel like an F
without the prism. I just couldn't afford to buy it as an "extra" at
the price it commanded.
--
Michael

Nikon SP
 

On 2014-02-01 19:44:21 +0000, Michael said:

On 2014-02-01 02:45:58 +0000, Robert Coe said:

On Tue, 28 Jan 2014 00:13:08 -0500, Michael wrote:
: My local auction house had an auction a week ago with 40 camera lots
: among the 400 or so at the auction, and most were junk or trivial, but
: the highlight (for me) was a pristine Nikon SP camera body (1962,
: titanium shutter). I really hoped against hope that no one else knew
: what it was, but that was too much to hope for. I went as high as $260
: which is a pittance for that camera, and it sold for only $560, which I
: consider a bargain. It would have cost me another $200 or so for the
: 50mm lens. Still a bargain, and probably could flip it for about
: double, but a very expensive camera to play around with as gorgeous as
: it is and as good as it is. But I really would have liked it for the
: amount that I bid.

Damn! I once had an SP, which I traded in (with its three lenses) on an F-2. I
guess I should have kept it.

Bob

Short of buying a brand new F6 ($2449 new from B&H, body only) the S1
from 1962 will bring in more than any model of the F. I know, I've had
two F's, one in its day with the Photomic FTN finder, and one a few
years ago with the plain prism (the old FTN photomics don't work
anymore). I sold the first to buy my Pentax 6x7 system which I still
have and use, and I sold the second one some months ago to KEH when
they came to my town. The S2 really does look and feel like an F
without the prism. I just couldn't afford to buy it as an "extra" at
the price it commanded.

Actually, I meant the S1 not the S2.
--
Michael

Nikon SP
 

On Sat, 1 Feb 2014 19:39:41 -0500, Michael wrote:
: On 2014-02-01 19:44:21 +0000, Michael said:
:
: On 2014-02-01 02:45:58 +0000, Robert Coe said:
:
: On Tue, 28 Jan 2014 00:13:08 -0500, Michael wrote:
: : My local auction house had an auction a week ago with 40 camera lots
: : among the 400 or so at the auction, and most were junk or trivial, but
: : the highlight (for me) was a pristine Nikon SP camera body (1962,
: : titanium shutter). I really hoped against hope that no one else knew
: : what it was, but that was too much to hope for. I went as high as $260
: : which is a pittance for that camera, and it sold for only $560, which I
: : consider a bargain. It would have cost me another $200 or so for the
: : 50mm lens. Still a bargain, and probably could flip it for about
: : double, but a very expensive camera to play around with as gorgeous as
: : it is and as good as it is. But I really would have liked it for the
: : amount that I bid.
:
: Damn! I once had an SP, which I traded in (with its three lenses) on an F-2. I
: guess I should have kept it.
:
: Bob
:
: Short of buying a brand new F6 ($2449 new from B&H, body only) the S1
: from 1962 will bring in more than any model of the F. I know, I've had
: two F's, one in its day with the Photomic FTN finder, and one a few
: years ago with the plain prism (the old FTN photomics don't work
: anymore). I sold the first to buy my Pentax 6x7 system which I still
: have and use, and I sold the second one some months ago to KEH when
: they came to my town. The S2 really does look and feel like an F
: without the prism. I just couldn't afford to buy it as an "extra" at
: the price it commanded.
:
: Actually, I meant the S1 not the S2.

Wasn't it called just the S, not the S1?

It was meeting the Japanese photographer Jun Miki, whose two S'es (one color,
one B&W) were the most beautiful cameras I'd ever seen, that made me vow to
own a Nikon. I bought an S2 when I was in college, traded it in on an SP (28,
50, 135) once I was out earning money, and later traded that in on an F-2
(also 28, 50, 135). But film was too time (and money) consuming, and I
gradually gave it all up. Not until I bought my first digital camera (in 2003)
did I go back in, whole hog.

Bob

Nikon SP
 

On 2014-02-11 04:14:17 +0000, Robert Coe said:

On Sat, 1 Feb 2014 19:39:41 -0500, Michael wrote:
: On 2014-02-01 19:44:21 +0000, Michael said:
:
: On 2014-02-01 02:45:58 +0000, Robert Coe said:
:
: On Tue, 28 Jan 2014 00:13:08 -0500, Michael
wrote:
: : My local auction house had an auction a week ago with 40 camera lots
: : among the 400 or so at the auction, and most were junk or trivial, but
: : the highlight (for me) was a pristine Nikon SP camera body (1962,
: : titanium shutter). I really hoped against hope that no one else knew
: : what it was, but that was too much to hope for. I went as high as $260
: : which is a pittance for that camera, and it sold for only $560, which I
: : consider a bargain. It would have cost me another $200 or so for the
: : 50mm lens. Still a bargain, and probably could flip it for about
: : double, but a very expensive camera to play around with as gorgeous as
: : it is and as good as it is. But I really would have liked it for the
: : amount that I bid.
:
: Damn! I once had an SP, which I traded in (with its three lenses)
on an F-2. I
: guess I should have kept it.
:
: Bob
:
: Short of buying a brand new F6 ($2449 new from B&H, body only) the S1
: from 1962 will bring in more than any model of the F. I know, I've had
: two F's, one in its day with the Photomic FTN finder, and one a few
: years ago with the plain prism (the old FTN photomics don't work
: anymore). I sold the first to buy my Pentax 6x7 system which I still
: have and use, and I sold the second one some months ago to KEH when
: they came to my town. The S2 really does look and feel like an F
: without the prism. I just couldn't afford to buy it as an "extra" at
: the price it commanded.
:
: Actually, I meant the S1 not the S2.

Wasn't it called just the S, not the S1?

It was meeting the Japanese photographer Jun Miki, whose two S'es (one color,
one B&W) were the most beautiful cameras I'd ever seen, that made me vow to
own a Nikon. I bought an S2 when I was in college, traded it in on an SP (28,
50, 135) once I was out earning money, and later traded that in on an F-2
(also 28, 50, 135). But film was too time (and money) consuming, and I
gradually gave it all up. Not until I bought my first digital camera (in 2003)
did I go back in, whole hog.

Bob

Actually I didn't mean S2 or S1, but SP.
--
Michael