LETTER OF THE WEEK
Write to the Editor at ap.ed@kelsey.co.uk and include your full postal address. Please don’t send letters in the post as there is no one in the office to receive them. Replies are from the Editor unless otherwise stated
The first Brownie
I’ve been a follower of the AP for a good number of years. The ‘Readers Write’ in AP 19 September 1973 even published a photograph I sent in. Back then the AP was the go-to for all the very useful advertisements.
It was the source of nearly all my photographic material and equipment.
I still use some of it even today.
I really enjoyed the article by John Wade, The joy of snaps. Back then my parents had a Brownie camera of which a similar photograph of me in a toy car was taken in 1947. My own photographic journey started with a Bakelite 127 Brownie.
However, I’d like to point out that John Wade wasn’t strictly correct when he states that the illustration shows the first and last cameras bearing the Brownie name. The first Brownie Camera bearing that name was just that: ‘Brownie Camera’. First produced in February 1900. It had a slip-on back which was not entirely successful and was then modified to have a hinged back. The first versions of those were still named Brownie Camera. It only became the ‘No 1 Brownie Camera’ when new film sizes were produced in 1901.
The last Brownie camera to carry the name Brownie was the ‘Brownie II’. It was produced in Brazil in 1985. This too is a 110-format camera that was also sold as a Kodak Star. Yours sincerely, a bit of a Brownie nerd.
John Wade replies: Yes, I was aware of the shoe box type lid on the very first Brownie as opposed to the hinged back on the improved second model, and if you check my book, 50 Landmark Cameras That Changed Photography, you’ll see I made that very distinction. But writing for the more general readership of AP, I try to keep my collector nerdiness to a minimum. I wasn’t, however, aware of the Brazilian camera connection, and my collector nerd is grateful for that piece of info.
Lens nomenclature
Derek Smith’s daughter is right about lens nomenclature being confusing. I suggest something is added after the lens number to indicate the context. The most obvious would be MFT, APSC and FF.
Box clever
I read an opinion piece from a contributor on why he no longer keeps the boxes his photographic kit came in. May I express a contrary opinion?
When I first started buying used equipment I didn’t worry about whether it was boxed or not but for the past eight years I have tried to buy only equipment that comes in the original packaging. There are several reasons for this. First
