Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Learning
Photography Q&A
High ISO Performance and Fast Lenses
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="WayneF" data-source="post: 472574" data-attributes="member: 12496"><p>Ah yes, the memories. Most of which were cravings for gear I could not afford. I've more than made up for it now though. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p><p></p><p>Sears was a strong camera outlet in the day, top end stuff too. I was intensely into it then, and remember many things, but a big one is the ongoing dispute in the camera magazines (our only source of knowing anything current, the library books were too old)... was the dispute about the feasibility of actually building light meters into cameras, which was starting about then (semiconductors had been invented, although meters were mostly just older selenium cells then, no battery). Could a meter actually in the camera actually be trusted? And were we really going to allow it to actually zero the meter and to actually align the exposure and adjust the camera? It was big responsibility, and thus a pretty big deal, not that it was available, but that they were daring to do it to our cameras!</p><p></p><p>It was like all else, just fear of the unknown, but it was very seriously debated, not that it had any effect. It certainly was NOT an obvious plus at first. Only a few cameras did it early, but I remember even Leica offered one, just attached a little reflected meter on top of the camera, awkward little thing, but it worked like any other reflected meter (harder to aim). The catalog showed one like it in the hot shoe of the C3 (just a parking spot), but very few meters are in that catalog. The meter had to be pointed, and aligned, and then the settings made in the camera. They were mostly slow to add meters, I think really it needed a bit more technology first. Nikon was not fast to do it. I had about the third version FTn in 1968, which worked very well. Integrated TTL, a lot like today, except we had to turn the lens aperture ring to manually zero the meter every time. At least you could see the meter pointer in the viewfinder.</p><p></p><p> I guess we debate about fully automated now. I suspect some of the future will be about improving that automation. I hope Auto White Balance is first. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p><p></p><p>Little simple handheld selenium reflected meters were available then, not expensive, but becoming in wide enough use so that the next year, Kodak had to double the ASA speeds of all B&W films to remove a very husky safety factor (overexposure was good for B&W negative film ... expose for the shadows). Of course, we already knew to double it. But somehow it was better if we metered it ourself than to allow the ignorant camera to do it. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="WayneF, post: 472574, member: 12496"] Ah yes, the memories. Most of which were cravings for gear I could not afford. I've more than made up for it now though. :) Sears was a strong camera outlet in the day, top end stuff too. I was intensely into it then, and remember many things, but a big one is the ongoing dispute in the camera magazines (our only source of knowing anything current, the library books were too old)... was the dispute about the feasibility of actually building light meters into cameras, which was starting about then (semiconductors had been invented, although meters were mostly just older selenium cells then, no battery). Could a meter actually in the camera actually be trusted? And were we really going to allow it to actually zero the meter and to actually align the exposure and adjust the camera? It was big responsibility, and thus a pretty big deal, not that it was available, but that they were daring to do it to our cameras! It was like all else, just fear of the unknown, but it was very seriously debated, not that it had any effect. It certainly was NOT an obvious plus at first. Only a few cameras did it early, but I remember even Leica offered one, just attached a little reflected meter on top of the camera, awkward little thing, but it worked like any other reflected meter (harder to aim). The catalog showed one like it in the hot shoe of the C3 (just a parking spot), but very few meters are in that catalog. The meter had to be pointed, and aligned, and then the settings made in the camera. They were mostly slow to add meters, I think really it needed a bit more technology first. Nikon was not fast to do it. I had about the third version FTn in 1968, which worked very well. Integrated TTL, a lot like today, except we had to turn the lens aperture ring to manually zero the meter every time. At least you could see the meter pointer in the viewfinder. I guess we debate about fully automated now. I suspect some of the future will be about improving that automation. I hope Auto White Balance is first. :) Little simple handheld selenium reflected meters were available then, not expensive, but becoming in wide enough use so that the next year, Kodak had to double the ASA speeds of all B&W films to remove a very husky safety factor (overexposure was good for B&W negative film ... expose for the shadows). Of course, we already knew to double it. But somehow it was better if we metered it ourself than to allow the ignorant camera to do it. :) [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Learning
Photography Q&A
High ISO Performance and Fast Lenses
Top
