Re: Re: More about St. Pete's


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ TubeNet BBS ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Rick Denney on November 16, 2000 at 12:28:51:

In Reply to: Re: More about St. Pete's posted by It won't matter on November 16, 2000 at 02:18:53:

When we make a choice, we sometimes compromise one thing to get another. If you could get a St. Pete for $500 new, it made sounds nearly as good as a Hirsbrunner, you are willing to fiddle with it's many mechanical problems, and you are willing to take care of it because it isn't terribly durable, then you have a similar situation to the Ukrainian cameras. I might buy a risky horn if the sound was truly special and the price truly incredible.

I can buy a medium-format (read: professional and normally quite expensive) camera for one-tenth the price of a (West) German or Japanese camera of similar arrangement (read: pitch and size), and get what many regard as state-of-the-art optical performance (read: world-class sound). Yes, it will need work, probably right out of the box, and, yes, it is not for the faint-of-heart. But it is the only reason I have a medium-format SLR (read: professional-quality tuba), because I would never pay the price for a Hasselblad (read: Hirsbrunner).

But the St. Petes are not that cheap and don't (according to most) sound that good. So the formula doesn't work in their case. If a Kiev 60 camera with lenses (read: St. Pete) cost as much as a used Pentax 67 (read: Miraphone) or Hasselblad (read: Hirsbrunner), then I'd go with the better cameras used. But it is no more than a fifth of similar high-end equipmenet when bought new.

Rick "my name is Rick, and I'm a Kievaholic" Denney


Follow Ups: