| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
FrankS
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Posts: 27
Location: just north of Toronto, Canada
|
 Posted: Wed Jan 29, 2003 3:45 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Pacemaker Speed Graphic #4474xx
I think it might be 1949 because the F.P. shutter reads 1/100 sec. instead of 1/125.
Gandolph, could you please check your lists? Thanks!
_________________
...preferring to be on the shiny side of the film, Frank S.
[ This Message was edited by: FrankS on 2003-01-29 07:46 ]
[ This Message was edited by: FrankS on 2003-01-29 08:49 ] |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Gandolf
Joined: 26 Dec 2001
Posts: 328
Location: middle earth
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 30, 2003 3:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| 1947 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FrankS
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Posts: 27
Location: just north of Toronto, Canada
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 31, 2003 12:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
1947? Awesome! Thanks, Gandolf.
It amazes me to think that a 56 year old camera can outperform any brand new digital wunderkamera of today, regardless of price. On top of that, I can predict with 100% accurracy how many of today's digital marvels will still be producing photographs in 50 years: zero.
_________________
...preferring to be on the shiny side of the film, Frank S.
[ This Message was edited by: FrankS on 2003-01-30 16:05 ] |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
