The modern lenses concentrate to much on the sharpness only (and crappy bokeh, ugly flares), because sharpness is all many new DSLR-owners care about and notice.

1. Kodak Colorburst 100
2. Kodak Instamatic 104
3. Kodak Instamatic 174
4. Time Kinetic Optical
5. Marksman 120 Zenith Camera Corp metal body.
6. Bell & HowellDirect Series Zoomatic
7. Kodak Brownie 8mm movie camera
8. Clix De Luxe Metropolitan industries
9 .Argus seventy five
10. Kodak Duaflex II
11. Autographic Brownie #2 Folding Kodak ball bearing shutter Says use Autographic Film No A-120
12. Kodak Brownie Hawkeye Camera flash model
13. Polaroid Prontor -svs. 110A
14. Polaroid Land Camera Model 95
15. Vista View Deluxe 110

Maybe yes, maybe no. One reason some people start working with toy and vintage cameras is to take a lot of control away from the photographer. By no longer being in control of focus, aperture, shutter speed, light leaks, consistent film transport, double exposures, etc., etc., much is left to chance and a creative POV. This can be freeing for some and challenging for others. Either way, it can be a charge to one’s photographic vision — something we all need now and then.

Teru is an exception. Usually people use this kind of camera just as a shortcut to interesting images. I HATE that. As Garry Winogrand said there is no special way how a good picture should look like and extremely wide lenses (and crappy cameras too) are making picture look in a special way…

B5

~ William Eggleston

They are nowhere near as sharp as my Leica glass but they have a smooth look to them that is very sweet in high contrast locations. I’ve also tried some of the inexpensive Russian thread mount lenses and wide-open that vignette specials. Kinda fun to play around with.

But it’s too easy to get stuck with technical details and lose the focus on the photograph. No vintage camera effect or defect will help me to take better photographs. But I appreciate if a photographer knows why he uses a certain camera well for a certain subject. In the end it’s all about the photograph, and that’s where my thoughts are.

Here’s the project that got it all started for me–grabbing a Holga was how I fell in love with photography again… http://www.aaronfallon.com/honk.html

His images:

http://www.tichyocean.ch/Documentations/Works

The artist and the camera:

http://www.tichyocean.ch/Documentations/The_Artist

I had fun making my own lenses, years ago. I’d recommend it to anyone; it’s a rewarding process. Here’s the timeline, starting in about 1999, and going to 2007, when it petered out. Brian Smith in Miami owns it now, maybe he’ll take it further.

http://www.marktucker.com/plungercam/

Key to them working is making certain that they don’t look like someone just Photoshopped em up.

But I do not agree that boring subjects always make boring pictures. I do think in most boring subjects there is always one point of view that can be interesting. It just depends on the ability of the photographer to make it happen.

That said a great point of view on a boring subject is generally not as good as a great point of view in a amazing subject….. but that is lapalissian!