TIPA Camera Award Winners 2006

  • Thread starter Thread starter CT
  • Start date Start date
Well at least I purschased the right Wide Angle lens ;)
 
DJW said:
Well at least I purschased the right Wide Angle lens ;)
Click to expand...

Me to, doesnt mean I need another catalogue of products to lust after though;)

Thanks for the link:thumbs:
 
Well I see the Nikon D50 & D200 did well, but don't let Arkady see the Canon 5D for Pro's winning ;)
 
D200
Sigma 10-20mm
Nikon 105mm VR micro

It's going to be an expensive year. :shake:
 
why in gods name do they have a "prestige" brand award, isnt that like saying "well it might not be as good as some of the other brands (canon, oly, nikon, pani etc) but hell lets give it a seperate catogory and an award simply because of the badge. its either worthy of winning an award against similar spec cams, or its aint worthy of anything, just because of the badge does not allow it a seperate catagory. thats like saying "well the ford focus is a better car than the 3 series, BUT we think the 3 series deserves an award because of its badge, so lets give it a catagory on its own with maybe merc, audi and saab, just so it can win something
 
That's really pants that. How on earth a Ricoh qualifies for 'Prestige' status beats me. :thinking:
 
my point was less "that manufacture is SOOO not prestige" and more along the lines of the fact that the digital revolution has meant that the prestige brands do not now make the "best" cameras anymore like they once did, its like classing rovers as prestige cars because once upon a time (thinking back to the likes of the P5B people) they made prestige cars.

that rocoh, looks like a peice of ****, and has anyone read this months review of zeiss Ikon rangefinder.... nearly £1k for a film rangefinder body, are they taking the ****?
 
whitewash said:
that rocoh, looks like a peice of ****, and has anyone read this months review of zeiss Ikon rangefinder.... nearly £1k for a film rangefinder body, are they taking the ****?
Click to expand...

You might be interested in a Leica that Im sure Arkady was thinking about selling in that case, they go for more than that;)
 
sorry that is just rediculous for something that would in most cases just sit on the shelf and never be used, im sure leicas are lovely cameras but lets face it they're gonna be zip all use to the likes of me.

i dont want to get into a debate about the relative costs and merits of various cameras here, im just saying that for me £1000+ on a film rangefinder camera simply isnt money well spent.
 
Suppose it depends what your into, accepted digital will be the only choice in the near future, but alot of people do still use film and prefer the effect of film when printed, horses for courses really.
 
i like the look of film, i do still intend to shoot film from time to time, but that amount of money for what is percieved as "old technology" must surely be gaining more from being seen as a prestige brand and the price reflects that. leica were inculded in a list of percieved "cool brands" these days, go ask someone outside photography who makes the best cameras and the response will more than likely be some of the better known brands such as canon, oly, pani, fuji etc i doubt many would know who leica are, let alone think they were cool, the list id guess was made by asking the opinions of style concious celebrities such as posh and becks who have been told what to buy by their stylist/PR person to appear cool and actually has zip all to do with whether its the best product or not.




infact im going to conduct a bit of a survey...


edit: i am in no way attempting to take anything away from leica, they make excellent cameras that are precision engineered, i just dont honestly think that a price tag that high can really be given to a film camera in this day and age and must in some way be gaining from an appearance of "prestige"
 
whitewash said:
go ask someone outside photography who makes the best cameras and the response will more than likely be some of the better known brands such as canon, oly, pani, fuji etc i doubt many would know who leica are, let alone think they were cool, the list id guess was made by asking the opinions of style concious celebrities such as posh and becks who have been told what to buy by their stylist/PR person to appear cool and actually has zip all to do with whether its the best product or not.
infact im going to conduct a bit of a survey...
Click to expand...


Have you ever held a Leica? If you had you'd know why they're so expensive - instead of being stamped out of sheet metal as most cameras were, they're milled out of a solid billet of aluminium. That makes them solid - really solid. These cameras were designed to be used by photojournalists in the toughest conditions imaginable without ever going wrong, ever.
The lenses are still regarded as the best available and are the benchmark by which all others are judged to this day - the 50mm f/2 Summicron is the sharpest lens ever made - by anyone.

It's less a matter of presige than tools for the job - when Angus McBean began doing theatre photography, his employers bought him a Leica as it was at that time, the quietest camera available due to the rubberised silk shutter.
It's also less obtrusive than an SLR - since it appears more like a compact 'cheapo' camera, you can get away with using it in situations where a full-on Pro Kit might get you in trouble - Nepal, Indonesia, Baghdad etc. Claiming you're a tourist might keep you alive in some trouble spots.

Agreed the demise of film means that an M6 just isn't worth £1200 to most people, but there are still guys out there using film to record stuff that isn't for immediate use. Take a look at 8 Magazine ( www.foto8.com ) and see for yourselves. If I was going to spend six months in a rainforest photographing indigenous tribesmen, I'd take my Nikon F5 and the Leica M6 instead of all my digi cameas, laptops and sat-comms kit. I know I can carry enough batteries for the both of them, whereas the other kit? Maybe if I knew I'd be based in a village with a generator, but otherwise?

I know I can rely on these cameras to deliver the goods time and time again - whereas with digital? I've already had dramas with one of my D2x bodies, who's to say that extended damp conditions over a six month period wouldn't kill them both? And with electronics, if they go down, that's it. I can repair the Leica at a pinch (I met a guy in southern Afghanistan who can build you a replica of a Leica M6 in 48 hours - no duff. They also make any weapon known to man there...for a small fee) wherever I may be, but a digi camera?

Finally, in response to the above point you make: why would you ask people outside photography who makes the best camera? How the Hell would they know?
I don't know who makes the best Tennis Racket, but I'm sure that a Pro Tennis Player does...
 
Well that sums that up then :D

I've never held a Leica never mind shot with one so I cant really comment on their quality, but I've allways assumed a product/brand becomes prestigious for a reason, they can quickly lose this status again of course... as far as I know this isn't something that has happened to Leica.
 
Last time I was up at Leica getting it checked out before a trip abroad, the service department manager told me he'd re-calibrated the focus as well, saying "it was 0.2mm out." Since they measure it over a 20' distance, I was surprised. "Depth of field will take care of a discrepancy that minor," I told him. True he said, but they get people in there complaining of errors even less than that. Some people even have thier own calibration equipment, he told me.
"But then you use yours to take photographs, don't you?" Apparently, a lot of current customers buy them as jewellery or as ornaments, hence all the 'limited edition', gold with croc-skin etc. models on the shelves.
That bad? I asked him. He was a little dismayed that what was once the premier tool of the photo-journalist has now become a fashion item bought for investment purposes.
But he also believed that their digi rangefinder would sort things out for the company. Time will tell...
 
Apparantly if you want a really collectable Leica, you don't even have to remove the shrink wrapping from it. :cuckoo:
 
I must admit,

I'm off travelling next year at some point with the g/f and I'm seriously considering taking film kit only, just from a reliability PoV, plus we're going to be going to some pretty remote/scary places...........


However, I could live in india for 5 years on the amount of money a leica set-up would cost.
 
While we're on the topic of film stuff...

Now that Canon have all but ceased production of film kit, is it possible to pick up reasonably old, film 'pro' bodies (ie EOS 1 series bodies) on eBay for bargain prices? Anyone know?

I wouldn't want anything non-weatherproof as I'd be most likely to use any film kit when conditions weren't ideal for digital (not that I'm criticising digital, I just can't afford a weatherproof DSLR but I'm hoping maybe I can afford a weatherproof film SLR).
 
Absolutely. Old Nikon kit goes on the Nikon Pro website all the time for silly prices and I'd imagine the Canon's are the same - Pro's all upgraded to digital years ago so there are loads of Pro bodies around for about £500 or less.
Gray's of Westminster have mint F5 bodies for £500 and if you search for ones that are cosmetically 'scuffed' a bit they cost next to nothing.
One of the reasons I have my F5 still is that I couldn't get more than £300 for it, as it has a couple of minor (and I mean very minor) scuffs on the top plate where it rubbed against my second body for about half an hour one day when I was in a hurry packing my kit.

Just look around.
 
For under £200 that's a bargain.

I can see a resurgence of film-use on here as everyone realises that you can get a pro-camera for pence compared to a 'budget' digi-SLR...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top