…. we snapped in monochrome.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/45ad5/45ad596c5bdb9b8c175b57708f84d39181a46044" alt=""
Oakland Bay Bridge, D700, 24mm.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/0216c/0216cca1299bff60ebb2d134f8618321f6061c39" alt=""
Gold Street, Jackson Square. Click the picture for the map. Same hardware as above.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c889f/c889ffa97c0bbd09164a52dabd36c74d2c61ba05" alt=""
Hotaling Street, Jackson Square. Same gear.
The 24mm Nikkor is special. It was special when I sold them, as a clerk at Dixons in London in 1969, to rich American tourists, and it remains special today, at a fraction of the cost. At that time I was quite convinced that Americans were so affluent that they never had a shirt laundered. They merely threw it away and donned a new one. And that 24mm seemed every bit as remote from that world as I was back then.
Back then the only people who could afford color prints were those self same Americans. Of course, despite all their costly gear, they opted for 3 1/2″ x 5 1/2″ machine made Kodak prints, just like their successors today who think nothing of using a $10,000 camera to publish their work exclusively in 600 pixel sizes on the web. Many of these are the same people lining up to upgrade to a 36mp D800 ….
In 1974, when mine was made, the 24mm f/2.8 Nikkor-N.C ran $316.51, which is $1,472.72 in today’s money. I think I got a bargain at $165 for a mint one.