Warning: This one has little to do with cameras and goes all over the place. Also the narrow of mind may take issue with this post so they should also take a pass. I revert back to an early Randon Neural Firing blog post topic for a moment. For those unfamiliar a little bit of, “Oh. Now the talking cheese is going to preach to us.”, may creep in.
You have been warned.
Still there? Ok. Welp. Here we go.
I recently stated something in a gear post ramble that got me thinking.
Add to that the fact that I am very happy with the non vintage, because Sony has no vintage SLR to harken back to, Sony A7C.
What I started thinking is that a lot of people point to heritage and legacy as if they are always a good thing.
But are they really? At least not always I would say.
Take the topic of that post, the Nikon Zf. My main bone of contention was based on comparing it to the film SLR it is calling back to. I started wondering, “If I had not had that F3 or FM,…
…would I have been more content with the Zf?”. Probably. I think that is why I happily carry my little heritage free A7C without a second thought.
It has no standard to adhere to so it is allowed to be its own nebulous mirrorless quasi rangefinder-ish looking thing with no ancestor waiting in the wings to compare it to.
Take Leica for instance. The Leica I settled upon has detractors.
Why? For some it committed the crime of having… dun, dun, dun… video. Check out that little “M” button above. The one I forget exists and have used out in the wild only once to see what it would look like. It was decidedly not completely awful.
How offended were the adherents? The very next variant of this generation removed this moving picture blight on Leica-dome… Really? And years later no M camera has had video since. To an outsider this sounds like foolishness. If you do not want to use it for video just ignore the “M” button. I completely forget it exists honestly, but I am not bothered by its inclusion and I like that it is there if I should ever want to use it again. But that is the power of legacy. And a downside in my opinion. And this behavior is not just limited to cameras.
Take cars for example. Many from my generation may remember when Ford played with the idea of replacing the Mustang with a front wheel drive platform based on the Mazda 626. Mustang-dome went ballistic. The result. The Fox body based RWD Mustang soldiered on and that horrible FWD aberration… became the Ford Probe. A perfectly fine car, based on a perfectly fine car. Car and Driver summed up the car this way:
The Verdict: A grownup GT, with sleek styling and smooth manners.
The horror. I mean I get it. I am happy the Mustang remained true to its roots and in defense of the fans the Mustang lives on while its main competitors went out of production, went back into production, and both have recently ended their production again while the Mustang lives on. Not only does it live on a recent variant has been compared favorably to a more prestigious legacy brand model.
This theme often repeats with cars. I am guilty of this thinking also. When Chevy released the most recent Blazer…
…my first thought was, that is not a Blazer. It is a crossover with a Blazer badge slapped on it. This is a Blazer.
A Blazer is based on a full size truck and has two doors in my world. Then I quickly went “meh”, the new not a Blazer does look nice though, and moved on with my life. But truth be told Chevy still makes a Blazer with two additional doors and it is called a Tahoe. Some take issue with Toyota using the Supra name for what many argue is “just” a rebadged BMW. Have heard some opine that the new Nissan Z is “just” a warmed over old Z. Some had issue with Ford using the Mustang name for their EV SUV. But then folks drove it and seemed to get over themselves. There are many more examples of the same. Customers balking at a naming exercise gone wrong fueled by nostalgia when the resulting product was not all that bad and might not exist otherwise.
And that is the same issue when it comes to cameras often times. And for the same reason. Companies are for profit entities at the end of the day. With that the most cost effective method of getting a product out the door is modifying something that is already produced, not creating a completely new platform not knowing if anyone will buy it. Hence the Zf and PEN-F mentioned in my last post. They look the part but underneath the new frock they are essentially also rans. Nice looking ones admittedly. But this is where I take a heck of a detour. Because this got me thinking more. Cars and cameras are pretty innocuous as far as issues with nostalgia go. But this same thinking can be found elsewhere. Often in areas where this type of thinking is quite dangerous.
Society has this same issue.
A lot of people seem unable to move forward due to an inherent drive to stay “loyal” to the past. Old ideals that are just flat out wrong are rewritten and romanticized and then protected by some like they are national treasures when in actuality they are blights on society that should be irradicated from existence. As if admitting what is wrong… is wrong somehow invalidates the republic. As a result actual history is rewritten as Disney-fied pablum so as to be easily digestable by those who are fragile of spirit. For example:
Methods and tactics utilized to “found” and build the nation I reside in are now all felonies in the resulting republic. Long after the transfer of land and labor has benefited those primarily in power that is. But now if someone calls it wrong they are treated like unpatriotic heretics. But it happened. It was wrong. That is why it is now illegal. Some feel so strongly about this they do not even want actual history to be taught. Monuments to these outdated beliefs are to be protected if you listen to some. Take a recent headline I read.
A judge halted the removal of a Confederate memorial at Arlington National Cemetery
This disappoints me, but it does not surprise me. When I posted the article I added the context:
Monument to vanquished traitors allowed to persist in a solemn place of the victor’s republic finally may be taken down.
There is no lie here. No animus. They were traitors at war with the republic. In what seems a sick joke a monument to them sits among the graves of the republic that defeated them. Spin all you want to but them’s the facts. In this case legacy is the menace. An adherence to a heritage of hate. Again, I am not surprised. Will not give them my anger. That would require handing over the control of my better self to those who care nothing about me. They do not deserve such. So many are so obsessed with a past that never was. I recently posted this mini rant:
The “good old days” is a myth. Fantasy at best, delusion at worst. Actual history teaches that each age had its horrors. Best we can do is not be the horror of our own age rather than lament over a past that never was.
But let me lighten the tone for a moment and pivot back to the opening premise.
Heritage and legacy choking out change.
As I stated in that post about the Nikon Zf I am glad that they made it. My personal quibbles set aside the changes made are a product of the times. Like that Supra or Nissan Z if the choice is between making a legacy product based on existing hardware or not making a Supra, Nissan Z, or Zf at all, I choose the former. Change is necessary. Celebrate an attempt at bringing back what was within the confines of economic sensibilities. It is a new day. Like I said I am glad Nikon made it. If I ever locate my money tree that Zf will be mine soon after… as would be a Supra, Mustang GT, or Nissan Z test drive.
And like I stated above memory is a poor metric. Things were often full of nostalgia but not all that great in actuality. One example was a recent epiphany. There is a car that is a legend in my mind. My Dad’s Buick Electra 225. Loved that car. It plays a star role in my childhood memories. It is my Starsky and Hutch Gran Torino. My screaming chicken Trans Am from Smoky and the Bandit. I always added that it came with an Oldsmobile 403 my Dad special ordered. I remember this because I was sat right next to him when he ordered it, between him and my Mom. Massive. A roaring beast. And he actually let me drive it. I loved this car.
I would occasionally gun the engine at a standstill and watch as that 6.6L of reciprocating internal workings twisted the whole front of the car. The car felt like it flew. Gunning the engine at speed would send that Buick badge at the front of the hood skyward and make the back end a bit squirrely. Then I made an error. I recently looked up the specs on that engine.
185 hp
What?
Then I looked up the weight of a 1979 Buick Electra 225.
3,770 lbs
Oof.
So… my memories are effectively delusions. That does not mean that I did not have a great childhood. But the car that played a pivotal role was a pretender. Noise, bluster, and large numbers masquerading as actual performance. On brand ‘Murca now that I think about it. I picked up a prized VW a few years ago. It is currently my wife’s conveyance and it is one of the best cars we have ever owned. Nothing exotic. A VW Passat with a V6 and automated manual transmission that they offered for a few years. I have to check but I believe it is the most powerful engine VW offered in that body style. They later went exclusively to smaller mills, but even the ones with forced induction did not match these numbers. Here are the comparative specs.
280 hp and 3,481 lbs
Another 95 hp from <checks notes> 3.6L. It does not take a math whiz to work out that this mild mannered Passat would destroy my beloved 225 in a 0-60 run. Unfortunately, I did not stop there. What about a car from my youth that I would have loved to have had. A 1985 Ford Mustang GT. Welp…
210 hp and 3,200 lbs
Oy.
But thanks to the weight difference and being built to go fast in a straight line that Mustang would destroy a common modern family sedan in a straight line, right? Right! Well per Car and Driver…
1985 Mustang GT 0-60: 6.4 seconds
2014 VW Passat V6 SE 0-60: 6.3 seconds
Side note. I was a huge Car and Driver reader. I had subscriptions to them Road and Track and Automobile magazine but Car and Driver was the one that initially got me hooked.
Sigh. A roaring blat-blat legend in my mind matched by a modern grocery getter. In an odd convergence/twist I found that a 1979 screaming chicken Trans Am used a tweaked variant of the 403 Olds mill found in my Dad’s 225 that Car and Driver says was good for a 0-60 of 6.7 seconds. I am not sure if this is good for the 1979 Buick Electra or bad for the 1985 Ford Mustang. But this is all good. I never got my hands on a Mustang GT, but I am happy t0 say we have enjoyed this grocery getter V6 Passat for many trouble free years. While I will not be looking for any old Trans Ams or Mustangs to square up to at a light it is good to know that it can hold its own.
Which is to say I prefer the change. More than adequate performance with two more doors, a usable backseat, and better gas mileage. 27 MPG as opposed to 12 MPG for the Trans Am and 14 MPG for the Mustang. Am I saying that the Passat is better in all cases? No. My inner adolescent would leap over the hood of this Passat to jump into an old school Mustang or Trans Am for some hoonery on backroads or a vacant parking lot. But at the end of the day after the fun was over I would head straight for the VW on the ride home. And while it is no BMW in the turns its limits in the corners exceed both of the old timey contestants.
There is no issue with fondly remembering the past. I had a fantastic childhood. But I will not allow myself to become delusional about it. That old Buick? After repeated attempts by body shops to keep it together it eventually headed towards rust bucket status and when you add in the weird gyrations the suspension started making it was time to let it go. Otherwise it risked being a money pit. That rust thing was a fate many a beloved Woods vehicle fell prey to in the end. Combine that with intermittent fits of unreliability and they all faced ignoble ends. Funny how easily we gloss over those less pleasant details. Modern cars may be a bit lacking in pinache, but they all seem to hold together way better than cars back in the day. This is a good thing.
Along the same lines, I am glad there are slights that I faced that my kids saw less of. It is my hope that this continues to improve for the next generation. I would never want to go back. And my parents always let me know that they felt the same way about their generation. They made the best of things, but do not get fooled by those old pics. They would never want to go back.
With time comes change. Or at least it should. If not why are we here? Certainly not to mindlessly cling to what was. To do the same things over and over again. And change is good. Required even. My Father would say:
In life there is no standing still. To maintain is in actuality a slide backwards so slight as to escape notice until the sudden, inevitable realization that significant ground has been lost. Always keep moving forward.
-RLW
And in order to move forward we must be willing to let go of the less savory parts of the past, not lie to ourselves so we can cling to them.
-ELW
Eric L. Woods 