Student camera

Why are some of the best film cameras such as the Minolta SRT's,
Nikkormat's, Canon F-series, etc called student cameras??


Colyn Goodson
http://home.swbell.net/colyng
http://www.colyngoodson.com

ColynG© wrote:

Why are some of the best film cameras such as the Minolta SRT's,
Nikkormat's, Canon F-series, etc called student cameras??


Good question. I suspect it's a cheap subliminal trick to get a
prospective customer to upgrade. I've been longing for a completely
manual 35mm for a while now. No meter, no frills..even a 42 mm thread
mount is fine. I'd like excellent build quality, something that will
outlive me by a few years. A machined out of billet aluminium frame
would be nice, as would a top speed of say, 1/6000 of a second.

All that for under three hundred bucks.

I'd carry a good meter, or course.

No auto anything. Makes one use their mind instead of the camera's
computer. A skill becoming more scarce each year.

ColynG© wrote:
Why are some of the best film cameras such as the Minolta SRT's,
Nikkormat's, Canon F-series, etc called student cameras??

columbotrek wrote:
No auto anything. Makes one use their mind instead of the camera's
computer. A skill becoming more scarce each year.

I'd like to quote something, that made sense to me, from Tony Spadaro's
website:

---snip begin------
Manual or Automatic?
Should you start with a manual focus camera? Many people advise this
course, claiming it will 'force' you to learn the basics of
photography, allow you to buy a less expensive used camera, and be
easier to focus most of the time anyway. It's an interesting argument,
but one without basis in the real world. Lets look at these three
points one at a time.

Is Force Necessary?
I presume you are taking up photography voluntarily. At least I haven't
heard of anyone being compelled to learn photography on pain of
imprisonment, or loss of life. Why does one need to be forced into
doing what one already wants to do? You will either learn the
principles of photography, which can be done as easily with an
auto-matic camera that allows manual setting as it can with a manual
camera, or you will not learn the principles of photography. If you
choose not to learn, the auto-camera will still be usable as a fine
point and shoot.
---snip end--------

Ok, I presume this is the beginning of another long-boring auto vs
manual thread sigh

- Siddhartha

Couldn't have said it better myself --- Oooops!

--
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com
home of The Camera-ist's Manifesto
The Improved Links Pages are at
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/links/mlinks00.html
A sample chapter from "Haight-Ashbury" is at
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/writ/hait/hatitl.html

"Siddhartha Jain" wrote in message
oups.com...
columbotrek wrote:
No auto anything. Makes one use their mind instead of the camera's
computer. A skill becoming more scarce each year.

I'd like to quote something, that made sense to me, from Tony Spadaro's
website:

---snip begin------
Manual or Automatic?
Should you start with a manual focus camera? Many people advise this
course, claiming it will 'force' you to learn the basics of
photography, allow you to buy a less expensive used camera, and be
easier to focus most of the time anyway. It's an interesting argument,
but one without basis in the real world. Lets look at these three
points one at a time.

Is Force Necessary?
I presume you are taking up photography voluntarily. At least I haven't
heard of anyone being compelled to learn photography on pain of
imprisonment, or loss of life. Why does one need to be forced into
doing what one already wants to do? You will either learn the
principles of photography, which can be done as easily with an
auto-matic camera that allows manual setting as it can with a manual
camera, or you will not learn the principles of photography. If you
choose not to learn, the auto-camera will still be usable as a fine
point and shoot.
---snip end--------

Ok, I presume this is the beginning of another long-boring auto vs
manual thread sigh

- Siddhartha

ColynG© wrote:

Why are some of the best film cameras such as the Minolta SRT's,
Nikkormat's, Canon F-series, etc called student cameras??

Why not? Something has to be reasonably unautomated, simple, relatively low
price and functional. Can call it anything you like, really.

You left out the ubiquitous student camera: K1000.

Cheers,
Alan

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.

On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 12:54:38 -0500, Alan Browne
wrote:

ColynG© wrote:

Why are some of the best film cameras such as the Minolta SRT's,
Nikkormat's, Canon F-series, etc called student cameras??

Why not? Something has to be reasonably unautomated, simple, relatively low
price and functional. Can call it anything you like, really.

You left out the ubiquitous student camera: K1000.

Cheers,
Alan

I can understand calling the K1000 a student camera since it was made
primarily for that purpose but the others had advanced features more
suited for hard use not the class trips to the park..


Colyn Goodson
http://home.swbell.net/colyng
http://www.colyngoodson.com

On Fri, 11 Feb 2005 22:11:50 -0800, columbotrek
wrote:

No auto anything. Makes one use their mind instead of the camera's
computer. A skill becoming more scarce each year.

Agreed...


Colyn Goodson
http://home.swbell.net/colyng
http://www.colyngoodson.com

Siddhartha Jain wrote:

snip
"doing what one already wants to do? You will either learn the
principles of photography, which can be done as easily with an
auto-matic camera that allows manual setting as it can with a manual
camera, or you will not learn the principles of photography."
snip

Ok, I presume this is the beginning of another long-boring auto vs
manual thread sigh

What Tony said there is truly sensible: those who want to learn will learn.

My SO has learned a lot on an SLR that has a "P" mode, yet also has A,S and M
modes. She is very comfortable and proficient in "A" as well as at judging how
much exp-compenstation might be needed for a particular scene.

She doesn't really like photography per se except as a means to collect images
for painting.

Cheers,
Alan


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.

On 12 Feb 2005 03:37:24 -0800, "Siddhartha Jain"
wrote:



I presume you are taking up photography voluntarily. At least I haven't
heard of anyone being compelled to learn photography on pain of
imprisonment, or loss of life. Why does one need to be forced into
doing what one already wants to do? You will either learn the
principles of photography, which can be done as easily with an
auto-matic camera that allows manual setting as it can with a manual
camera, or you will not learn the principles of photography. If you
choose not to learn, the auto-camera will still be usable as a fine
point and shoot.

Nobody should be forced to take up photography..it's something they
should want to do but learning by using automation just doesn't sound
like learning to me. It's kind of like using a calculator to do simple
math in school.. You won't learn to do it in your head like most of us
older people did..most kids can't even do simple math in their head.

Point & Shoot cameras were made with the once or twice a month snap
shooters in mind. If that's all you want to do, p&s is the way to go..

Ok, I presume this is the beginning of another long-boring auto vs
manual thread sigh

I don't have a problem with auto cameras (my XD-11 and XE-7 have it)
but to me at least manual is more fun..


Colyn Goodson
http://home.swbell.net/colyng
http://www.colyngoodson.com