Even more old tech (cameras)

[lunatic59]

I was looking for an old camera bag in the basement and came across my first digital camera, which I forgot I had.

Resurrecting the Minolta RD-175.

Spoiler

I bought this for studio catalog work. I had a catalog to produce in 1996 whose previous editions were done in black and white. I had three choices ... one, try and track down existing images from the manufacturers (they were all consumer products) which in 1996 would have been a mix of crude digital scans, transparencies (ie. slides) or photographic prints, take new photographs using film and have them scanned, or take new digital photography. Considering the time constraints, the first option was out, so it was really a cost/quality comparison between traditional film and scanning or digital photography still in its infancy.

Here was a bit I wrote about that.

Spoiler

Pictures without film . . . what a concept.

I admit, that in the beginning I was skeptical. After all, I had seen digital pictures from those consumer model cameras and they were pretty awful.
The honest evaluation came when I had to produce a catalog of maintenance products for a buying group that had no usable photography. After determining the cost of traditional photography plus all the labor involved in scanning images individually, not to mention the time involved, I started looking.

I needed a camera that could produce an offset-printable image around 3" that was equal to the quality of film. I decided on the Minolta RD-175 for several reasons. First, the sample images I had seen were acceptable. Second the camera body would accept industry-standard lenses (even though it does that screwy focal length doubling thing all digital cameras do.) Next, it could sync studio strobes — an absolute necessity for professional work. Finally, compared with the Kodak and Nikon cameras of the same class, there was no appreciable loss of quality or features for considerably less money.

Please keep in mind that this was 1996.

For the record, the camera was a Minolta Maxxum 500si film body with a digital back stuck on it and storage attached to the base. Storage was in the form of an internal PCMCIA hard drive ... yes, an actual spinning platter hard drive. . The whole contraption with lens cost around $5k. Considering it was introduced in 1995 for close to $10k, this was a deal. Images were stored in a proprietary format so you needed a utility to convert them ... it was supplied on a 3.5" floppy. Once converted they were 1.75 megapixels maximum resolution.

My current camera? A Nikon D3200. 24 MP ... Over 13X the resolution for 1/10th the price.

 

[Granite1]

My first digital camera was in my Nextel i580, and was 1.5 MP I believe.

Here's a picture of me with my first cell phone:

I had hair back then.

 

[zuben el genub]

I had one of this series. I had adapter lenses for it. I brought it into the office and let my boss play with it. His wife kept telling him he'd use up all my film. Got one of the first Coolpix after that.

I got a decent 8x10 photo of kid's first wedding from the Kodak.

 

[olbriar]

My first digital. Purchased in 1998

I thought I was in the big time.

 

[Clementine_3]

I don't recall which model or when exactly but my foray into digital cameras was a Sony Mavica.

 

[zuben el genub]

My first digital. Purchased in 1998

I thought I was in the big time.

That might have been the one I had if it had attachable macro and tele lenses.

I forgot I had this to play with:

 

[Slug]

Olympus C-1000L, purchased in 1996:

True TTL metering and viewing just like my OM film bodies and a stunning 850K pixels on a 1/2" CCD.