[julianburke]

Dave A does have a point here. We all know now what a strange designed camera the 42 was but the 41's were aging and as we were quickly slipping into the transistor age, something had to be done to advance television technology. Remember that IC's had not yet come onto the scene and we had not time tested germanium transistors and all was new for the time. RCA was already heavily invested in the space race and up to this time all RCA stuff was the stodgy art deco umber grey painted equipment and knew they had to update.

Now comes the RCA "NEW LOOK" light blue equipment with a fresh look. No more tubes and the solid state age!! I must say to develop a piece of equipment like a 42 was certainly not only a big leap in technology but was brave and risky considering it was all solid state except for the pickup tubes. After they learned of some bugs they developed the 43. Somewhat improved but back to the drawing board!

After learning solid state better then came the 44. No one can argue that the 44 was a bad design, it was a terrific camera for the time, highly respected, reliable and was a workhorse for many years to come; not only better looking but very much lighter in weight and RCA sales sold a world of these.

Yesterday I had to move a 42 to my new building and what a pill that was!! Remember, camera operators had to haul these 350 lb monsters up many flights of stairs in coliseums/baseball/football stadiums and many times on a daily basis when an elevator was not available. UGH!

Yes, the 42/43 had their faults but it was state of the art in the day, highly touted to be very promising with a new improved look and I think we call those "GROWING PAINS" BUT they actually did work, made fairly good color and for many years big time network shows! There are not many of these examples still around today, only a few but I am happy to have three of these to show where we came from in camera technology.

Sincerely, your camera nut collector, Julian Burke