If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
Nikon regresses in the low end, leaving one to wonder about their situation
In article , Eric Stevens
wrote: a box brownie was a mirrorless camera too. No it wasn't. They usually had two view finders (for portrait and landscape) with mirrors in each. there were a *lot* of brownie cameras, most *without* a mirror. there's no mirror on these: http://www.brownie-camera.com/5.shtml http://www.brownie-camera.com/5-2.shtml http://www.brownie-camera.com/95.shtml http://www.brownie-camera.com/7.shtml http://www.brownie-camera.com/41.shtml http://www.brownie-camera.com/83.shtml but these did: http://www.brownie-camera.com/32.shtml http://www.brownie-camera.com/33.shtml |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
Nikon regresses in the low end, leaving one to wonder about their situation
On 2016-08-23 22:42:18 +0000, nospam said:
In article , Eric Stevens wrote: a box brownie was a mirrorless camera too. No it wasn't. They usually had two view finders (for portrait and landscape) with mirrors in each. there were a *lot* of brownie cameras, most *without* a mirror. there's no mirror on these: http://www.brownie-camera.com/5.shtml That is a 1900 preview finder Box Brownie. http://www.brownie-camera.com/5-2.shtml Definitely not a "Box Brownie". http://www.brownie-camera.com/95.shtml Not a "Box Brownie". http://www.brownie-camera.com/7.shtml Not a "Box Brownie". http://www.brownie-camera.com/41.shtml Not a "Box Brownie". http://www.brownie-camera.com/83.shtml Not a "Box Brownie". but these did: http://www.brownie-camera.com/32.shtml http://www.brownie-camera.com/33.shtml Those are laughingly "Reflex Brownies", not "Box Brownies". However, this is the Brownie "Box" type that Eric and I were refering to: http://www.brownie-camera.com/69.shtml -- Regards, Savageduck |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
Nikon regresses in the low end, leaving one to wonder about their situation
On Tue, 23 Aug 2016 18:42:18 -0400, nospam
wrote: In article , Eric Stevens wrote: a box brownie was a mirrorless camera too. No it wasn't. They usually had two view finders (for portrait and landscape) with mirrors in each. there were a *lot* of brownie cameras, most *without* a mirror. there's no mirror on these: http://www.brownie-camera.com/5.shtml http://www.brownie-camera.com/5-2.shtml http://www.brownie-camera.com/95.shtml http://www.brownie-camera.com/7.shtml http://www.brownie-camera.com/41.shtml http://www.brownie-camera.com/83.shtml but these did: http://www.brownie-camera.com/32.shtml http://www.brownie-camera.com/33.shtml Of all the URLs you have cited above only the first relates to the subject of discussion, the *box* brownie. That site describes the optional view finder available after 1900. At some stage the view finders were built into the camera. e.g. http://www.brownie-camera.com/50.jpg and later http://www.nigel-roberts.info/images...ox-Brownie.jpg More Box Brownies were built after 1900 than before and it is virtually certain that most of these had view finders. If you insist that the name Brownie includes more than the Box Brownie, perhaps you should also include http://tinyurl.com/h5y8kdb -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
Nikon regresses in the low end, leaving one to wonder about their situation
On Wed, 24 Aug 2016 02:09:17 -0700 (PDT), Whisky-dave
wrote: On Tuesday, 23 August 2016 15:00:12 UTC+1, Savageduck wrote: On 2016-08-23 13:18:32 +0000, Whisky-dave said: On Tuesday, 23 August 2016 12:48:49 UTC+1, Savageduck wrote: On 2016-08-23 09:15:39 +0000, Whisky-dave said: On Monday, 22 August 2016 17:02:46 UTC+1, David Taylor wrote: On 22/08/2016 15:42, Whisky-dave wrote: [] My GX7 offers an electronic shutter mode, but it's not a mirroless camera and I don;t see it as a pro level camera either. I can't find any mirror in it! Enlighten me! a box brownie was a mirrorless camera too. Actually it wasn't. In the simple "Brownie" viewfinder it had a mirror, and if you had one which gave you the option of a landscape or portrait orientation (The three eyed Brownie VF, VF, & lens), it had two. What it didn't have was a reflex(WYSIWYG), through the lens system which also required a mirror to make the incoming light from the lens make that turn into the prism and viewfinder. http://www.brownie-camera.com/5.shtml Description: The camera that started it all was a leatherette covered card box with a wo oden film carrier. The original had no finder but did have V sighting lines on top. A clip-on accessory reflecting finder became available from August 1900. It had a detachable film winding key that I would imagine got lost o ften. This camera also introduced the 2 1/4" square format. I did say the "three-eyed VF, VF, lens" Brownie, not the original cardboard box Brownie. http://www.brownie-camera.com/47.jpg but that wasn't the first was it. The point was that a mirroless camera was THE FIRST camera so mirroless cameras have been out before any other even 35mm film and certainly before digital all that's happened is that the term mirroless means something differnt from a camera that doesn;t have a mirror. The first plastic brownie I used didn;t have a mirror in it, it did have an optical viewfinder. ... which did incorporate a mirror. My EOS M3 is mirrorless but I can certainly see my reflection via the sensor when I take the lens off. And teh fact that it';s mirroless doesn;t make it silent or thre;s no mechanical sound so what is the advantage to buying a mirrorless camera, for me it was the smaller size. The first camera I remmebr by name an ilford sportmans I found in a draw was mirrorless but in those days it didnlt mean much the key buzzword of the day was about reflex and pentaprisms. -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
Nikon regresses in the low end, leaving one to wonder about their situation
On Wed, 24 Aug 2016 02:19:34 -0700 (PDT), Whisky-dave
wrote: On Wednesday, 24 August 2016 01:07:27 UTC+1, Eric Stevens wrote: Of all the URLs you have cited above only the first relates to the subject of discussion, the *box* brownie. NO the subject was regarding what is a mirrorless camera. You can only say that with a straight face if you ignore the fact that further up the thread **you** wrote: "a box brownie was a mirrorless camera too." .... and ever since then various people have been pointing out that most of them did incorporate mirrors of one kind or another. Maybe that's not quite what you originally meant but it is what you originally wrote. That site describes the optional view finder available after 1900. At some stage .. at some stage and at another stage and yet another stage.... the view finders were built into the camera. e.g. http://www.brownie-camera.com/50.jpg and later http://www.nigel-roberts.info/images...ox-Brownie.jpg More Box Brownies were built after 1900 than before and it is virtually certain that most of these had view finders. Most cameras have viewfinders of some sort but I'm betting most photos are taken without the aid of a mirror. If you insist that the name Brownie includes more than the Box Brownie, perhaps you should also include http://tinyurl.com/h5y8kdb and they don't have mirrors in them. Crumbs! -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
Nikon regresses in the low end, leaving one to wonder about their situation
On Thu, 25 Aug 2016 02:03:59 -0700 (PDT), Whisky-dave
wrote: On Wednesday, 24 August 2016 23:11:19 UTC+1, Eric Stevens wrote: On Wed, 24 Aug 2016 02:09:17 -0700 (PDT), Whisky-dave wrote: On Tuesday, 23 August 2016 15:00:12 UTC+1, Savageduck wrote: On 2016-08-23 13:18:32 +0000, Whisky-dave said: On Tuesday, 23 August 2016 12:48:49 UTC+1, Savageduck wrote: On 2016-08-23 09:15:39 +0000, Whisky-dave said: On Monday, 22 August 2016 17:02:46 UTC+1, David Taylor wrote: On 22/08/2016 15:42, Whisky-dave wrote: [] My GX7 offers an electronic shutter mode, but it's not a mirroless camera and I don;t see it as a pro level camera either. I can't find any mirror in it! Enlighten me! a box brownie was a mirrorless camera too. Actually it wasn't. In the simple "Brownie" viewfinder it had a mirror, and if you had one which gave you the option of a landscape or portrait orientation (The three eyed Brownie VF, VF, & lens), it had two. What it didn't have was a reflex(WYSIWYG), through the lens system which also required a mirror to make the incoming light from the lens make that turn into the prism and viewfinder. http://www.brownie-camera.com/5.shtml Description: The camera that started it all was a leatherette covered card box with a wo oden film carrier. The original had no finder but did have V sighting lines on top. A clip-on accessory reflecting finder became available from August 1900. It had a detachable film winding key that I would imagine got lost o ften. This camera also introduced the 2 1/4" square format. I did say the "three-eyed VF, VF, lens" Brownie, not the original cardboard box Brownie. http://www.brownie-camera.com/47.jpg but that wasn't the first was it. The point was that a mirroless camera was THE FIRST camera so mirroless cameras have been out before any other even 35mm film and certainly before digital all that's happened is that the term mirroless means something differnt from a camera that doesn;t have a mirror. The first plastic brownie I used didn;t have a mirror in it, it did have an optical viewfinder. ... which did incorporate a mirror. No it did NOT. Yet, you looked in the top and saw out the front. How was this accomplished without a mirror? And my first box brownie wasnl't brown it was a pale cyan made of plastic in the 1960s the viewfinder was in the top corner. And how did the viewfinder work? -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
Nikon regresses in the low end, leaving one to wonder about their situation
On Thu, 25 Aug 2016 02:24:59 -0700 (PDT), Whisky-dave
wrote: On Wednesday, 24 August 2016 23:17:51 UTC+1, Eric Stevens wrote: On Wed, 24 Aug 2016 02:19:34 -0700 (PDT), Whisky-dave wrote: On Wednesday, 24 August 2016 01:07:27 UTC+1, Eric Stevens wrote: Of all the URLs you have cited above only the first relates to the subject of discussion, the *box* brownie. NO the subject was regarding what is a mirrorless camera. You can only say that with a straight face if you ignore the fact that further up the thread **you** wrote: "a box brownie was a mirrorless camera too." it was. The ilford sprotsman I used was alsow mirrorless as was the cosmic symbol, my practika L2 had a mirror in it my VLC2 had a removable mirror and removable pentaprism too. The vast majority of compact camera mirrorless. http://www.jessops.com/online.store/... dRAGwodxNkODw I believe the camerwa I mentioed above is alos mirrorless. "includes mirror for the perfect selfie". ... and ever since then various people have been pointing out that most of them did incorporate mirrors of one kind or another. But not teh first and NOT mine and not a significant number of cameras. for teh vast majority of camera it was the 'reflex' that set them apart from the other cameras. No one really brought a camera because it had a a mirror or because it didn't NOW in the 21st centry mirroless means something a little differnt. ... and this is why we are arguing. smartphones are all mirrorless. They are not Box Brownies (which is what we should be arguing about). Maybe that's not quite what you originally meant but it is what you originally wrote. my first box brownie (type camera) didn't have a mirror. We had two actually the other one didn't work. it had a removable lens well it did after it was dropped , well the whole front panel was removable but I don't think that's what is meant when you say the lens is removable. More Box Brownies were built after 1900 than before and it is virtually certain that most of these had view finders. Most cameras have viewfinders of some sort but I'm betting most photos are taken without the aid of a mirror. If you insist that the name Brownie includes more than the Box Brownie, perhaps you should also include http://tinyurl.com/h5y8kdb and they don't have mirrors in them. Crumbs! Yes but they are only classed as crumbs if they fall off the main object the brownie. otherwise you;d just call the cake a crumb cake. I;ve no idea whether or not the first original box brownies were brown or not I assumed the first one made might have been made from a brown box and that was a common colour for packing boxes of the time. -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Difficult Photo Situation | Terry | Digital Photography | 15 | May 28th 06 04:08 AM |
The only situation where things look bad | RichA | Digital SLR Cameras | 7 | May 20th 05 03:58 PM |
Hypothetical situation | Roxy d'Urban | 35mm Photo Equipment | 17 | February 16th 05 04:10 PM |
Weird Film Scan Situation | [email protected] | 35mm Photo Equipment | 5 | June 30th 04 02:33 PM |
Weird Film Scan Situation | Jorge Prediguez | Digital Photography | 2 | June 30th 04 01:45 PM |