Cameras you don't click with.

[Steven Lee]

Nikon F3. Lol. It could have been a great machine. I could write a book on all that's wrong on that camera. I've already written enough here.

I just searched for "Nikon F3" with your username as post author and did not find anything. Other than the stupid LCD in the viewfinder, what's in that book?

 

[KerrKid]

I forgot to mention my Nikon LiteTouch Zoom 120 ED. The ED stands for “Expect Death”. Nikon should be ashamed for putting their name on this raging Chinese piece of crap. I would set it on fire but I have too much respect for the environment.

 

[Craig]

Good point, I happily sold my GW690III recently. Just not enjoyable to use.

Interesting how cameras are perceived by different people. I love my Fuji, it's my most used film camera. The lens is amazing, I have gotten so many great shots with that camera. It's my travel camera that gives near 4x5 quality without the the hassle of 4x5.

 

[M-88]

Nikon should be ashamed for putting their name on this raging Chinese piece of crap.

Raging Chinese piece of crap was (and still is) what brought profit to so many brands. Market doesn't consist of professionals alone. Nikon made sure to be represented in every segment of it, much like everybody else.

The camera I never got used to is Canon AE-1. I know that shutter priorirty mode was a default automation for rangefinders of the 70s, but that had its reasons. Surely an SLR could benefit more from aperture priority. If only AE-1 wasn't glorified nowadays, pretty much like Pentax K1000. Oh wait, that's another camera I don't click with! It's just too cumbersome. Remids me of Soviet Zenit.

 

[Dirb9]

The 80s Pentax SLRs with push buttons for shutter speed: ME, Super A, 645, etc. I suppose the early Maxxums (5, 7, 9) are the same. Wheels and dials are so much faster and easier to adjust, than pressing a mushy button and hoping it'll go the speed you want. There's some cameras out there with sliders that suffer the same issue. Both Pentax and Minolta eventually went back to dials in the 90s, so I'll give them credit for realizing their folly. I've wanted the Pentax contemporaries of the Nikon FE/FM but just settled with the earlier K series instead.

I'll also add, using the Minolta X700 in manual mode is a exercise in frustration. Might as well have just left it off. Ditto for the Canon EF, as great a camera as it is in shutter priority, I really wanted to like it more.

 

[madNbad]

I am having trouble warming up to my Kodak Retina IIa. My fingers don't fall onto the right places. Great lens, precise, compact, perfect film advance, but it (I?) doesn't fit.

I love my IIa. It was the IIc and IIIc with the goofy advance lever on the bottom and the cheap cocking racks that strip if you're not careful. I like the Oly XA but never understood the fascination with the Mju.

 

[madNbad]

Nikon F - looks cool but when you then use an F2 you think, oh yeah, this is much better. Sold off my Fs.

I really liked the F and the Nikkormat, too. Sold them all, kept the Leica M.

 

[Moose22]

All the cheap P&S cameras feel like squeaky blobs of plastic. But force yourself to shoot a roll of film through that Pentax and check out the results.

Agreed. They take excellent photos. I've given them away, but I actually bought two, for less than $55 total. Their current custodians have taken many rolls with them never worrying the least about cost or damage.

They aren't elegant, but the picture quality is great.

 

[abruzzi]

lots for me--
- Nikon F3 -- I don't quite know why, but it gel for me
- Canonet QL 17 -- I prefer cameras I can set to manual and still use the meter
- Spotmatics -- I really wanted to love these, but I prefered the simplicity of bayonet mounts and open aperture metering (I know the Spotmatic F had open aperture metering, but at this point, I've made my choices.)
- any camera with "match needle" metering--I just hate it for some reason. I want a simple over/under needle instead.

These days I'd be happy to dump all my 35 except a Pentax MX and a Nikon F2SB. The rest gather dust.

 

[albada]

I am having trouble warming up to my Kodak Retina IIa. My fingers don't fall onto the right places. Great lens, precise, compact, perfect film advance, but it (I?) doesn't fit.

Kodak recognized your problem and fixed it in later models...
by...
putting the film-advance lever on the bottom!

Mark

 

[cramej]

RB67 - I actually liked the camera system quite a bit but didn't really take to 6x7. Sleeving the negatives was a pain and the aspect ratio was just a bit off for me. Funny that I don't feel the same about 4x5 being that it is close to the same ratio.

SWC - great lens, lightweight, just didn't like the way it felt in my hands. Awkward to hold. I like my Bronica S2a with the Nikkor 40mm much better.

Anything shutter priority such as the QL17.

Anything Canon (except the LTM rangefinders... those are great! ). Didn't like a friend's AE-1 and absolutely hated the 5dii that I borrowed.

 

[250swb]

The Olympus OM's, especially the OM4 Ti. They are theoretically a great idea and I lusted after them in the days I lugged around my Nikon F2's for work. So a few years ago, and no longer a working photographer, decided to get one and indulge in my dream. But ages pass and now I am a slow film, tripod mounted sort of guy, and getting to the itsy bitsy 'B' setting button drove me nuts, it's almost impossible using a QR plate on a tripod, especially if I had to take my gloves off. And the impossible to turn shutter speed ring when using gloves! So that gathered dust before being sold.

Hasselblad 500CM, my first medium format camera, I hated it. Just owning it was a palaver, the sheer embarrassment that people wanted to talk about my Hasselblad more than my pictures, dodging questions by saying 'it's just a camera', the shininess of it when photographing in public, the stupid price of every accessory, and then the internal debate whether to show I was using 'a proper camera' by printing the full frame with the registration notches. I sold it and bought a Mamiya C330s, ah the relief....

 

[film_man]

Cameras I didn't click with...let me think:

Nikon F5 & F100: they are extremely capable and some of my favourite lenses are F mount but for some reason I just never enjoyed using them. I always go back to the Canon EOS cameras which I find they fit my hand much better.

Prakticas and all the other cheap M42 cameras stuff: God awful stuff to use.

Hasselblads: Owned two 501CMs and a 500ELX over 5-6 years, as much as I love the output they always gave me wrist pain and hated using them. Slow to focus, awkward to hold (the ELX is much better actually), stupid prices for everything, the occassional jam, shutter bounce ie "you get 4 shutter speeds to use 1/60-125-250-500".

Mamiya C330F/S: much nicer than the Hasselblad but just as slow to focus and got very front heavy as you focused closer. At least it cost the price of a Hasselblad lens cap and gave me just as nice photos.

Mamiya 6: I felt that it was one rough shove from falling apart. Also, the 75 is too slow at f/3.5 and too long min focus to be useful as anything but an environmental portrait lens or for square landscapes. Nah.

Hasselblad H2F: easy to use, great output but from a shooting perspective it was just like lugging around the F5 with the 85/1.4 (so see first point above).

I've owned lots of other cameras that I enjoyed using but ended up selling as one can only have that many cameras in the house before awkward questions are asked, I think the above are the ones I knew they were wrong within a roll of use. In the end they all make great photos, it is just how much I like using them.

 

[rcphoto]

Olympus OM-1: Shutter speed control in the wrong place, flimsy film advance mechanics, gimmicky screen that is too big to be useful. And the worst part is the owners -- they're part of a horrible Koolaid-drinking club that thinks this is the ultimate camera system.

Preach

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Same for me. Had one and sold it after a year. Awkward to hold and use and the one I had was a shop queen.

You must be kidding; there like an extension of my arm. I wouldn't want to be without mine

 

[mtnbkr]

I tend to be pretty picky about cameras before I buy them, so I don't have too many experiences with cameras I don't like.

Probably the closest "didn't click" one was the Graflex Crown Graphic 4x5. The camera worked fine, but I found the overall process of shooting large format tedious.

Oh! I just remembered the Canon QL17 rangefinder...It just didn't suit me, so I sold it. I had it in my hands less than 4 months. This was back in the early 200s before they went full retard price-wise.

Chris

 

[AnselMortensen]

Leica IIIf.
Tiny squinty viewfinder, and having to focus the tiny squinty viewfinder....
And don't even get me started on the whole ridiculous film prep and loading procedure.

Nikon EM.
I think it came out of a CrackerJack box.

Brand 17 4x5 camera.
Cast pot-metal boat anchor.
Interesting design in theory..
(cool handle!)...but
horrible in practice.

 

[ic-racer]

I thought this was about cameras with electronic shutter release. My first camera with an electronic shutter release was the Rolleiflex SLX. Originally designed in the mid 1970s my SLX served me well into the 20 teens.

 

[henryvk]

Lubitel 166 was garbage too. A super lens that gave unique images wrapped in a camera body that could not focus w any degree of accuracy, and a film advance mechanism that failed after 3 rolls.

Lomographic Society made an updated Lubitel, called the 166+, that you can actually focus. It's an infinitely better user than the original Lubitel but it's not perfect either. Lomo steered this camera into too-gimmicky a direction by adding 35 mm capabilities, including an actual 35 mm frame-counter and a rewind crank as well as making the lens hood removable so you can install a mask for the proper FOV. This was largely misguided imo and their efforts should have gone into making the design a good MF camera first and not a quirky Lomo vehicle.

It's still a vast improvement (and a camera that I've put many dozens of rolls through) if only for the focusing screen, but they could have done so much better still.

 

[rcphoto]

I'm sure I'll catch some flack for this but the Nikon N8008(s) cameras. They felt so bad in my hands and that was really disappointing for something listed in their high end category

 

[Paul Howell]

No good reason, the Nikon F4, I bought it to use my MF Nikon AI lens I still had. Another is the Pentax ME, good camera, just never took a liking to it.

 

[Huss]

Lomographic Society made an updated Lubitel, called the 166+, that you can actually focus. It's an infinitely better user than the original Lubitel but it's not perfect either. Lomo steered this camera into too-gimmicky a direction by adding 35 mm capabilities, including an actual 35 mm frame-counter and a rewind crank as well as making the lens hood removable so you can install a mask for the proper FOV. This was largely misguided imo and their efforts should have gone into making the design a good MF camera first and not a quirky Lomo vehicle.

It's still a vast improvement (and a camera that I've put many dozens of rolls through) if only for the focusing screen, but they could have done so much better still.

My 166 was the Moscow Olympics anniversary edition. So not sure if that was actually the regular or later 'improved' version. The lens actually was so good it really sucked that the rest of the camera was so bad.

 

[flavio81]

I don't like the FE because the film advamce lever needs to be pulled out to turn the camera on and unlock it. Since I'm left eyed, that pokes me in the eye and made the camera basically unusable.

I agree, this is what I don't like from the FE. When you fit a motor drive, then you don't need to do that anymore, which is a blessing. This is what annoys me from the FE, otherwise it's a great machine.

 

[flavio81]

I just searched for "Nikon F3" with your username as post author and did not find anything. Other than the stupid LCD in the viewfinder, what's in that book?

Maybe you did an incorrect search. Try:

Search results for query: F3

www.photrio.com

Some examples (author=flavio81)

The list of things that are crippled on the F3 cs F2 can be very long...

- Awful "+/-" tiny meter display (instead of extremely clear LEDs or needles)
- Tiny, awful LED display (instead of clear numbers)
- Only two mechanical speeds. No battery tester to see how much you've left (unlike Canon F-1 and even Nikon's FE)
- Mushy shutter button, you never know where the trigger point is (unlike the precise F2 button)
- Viewfinder not as clear
- Finder Illuminator never works (it never fails on the F2SB and F2AS)
- You can have high eyepoint or good magnification but not both. F2 gives you both.
- Memory lock button often falls down with age
- Tiny, fragile multiple-exposure lever on akward location
- Confusing control placement, it's hard to remember which one is the self timer switch versus shutter button lock switch (they're identical). If the shutter is locked you might be confused and think the batteries are gone, since the behavior is exactly the same. The F2P fixed this with a mechanical shutter button lock.

and the worst of all...

- Meter relies on glass FRE resistor, which is placed exactly below the flash hot shoe. So if your flash bumps into a wall or somebody bumps with your flash, there's your chance for your meter to be gone because of breakage of glass FRE disc. This has happened before. So the most delicate part is placed where it can be knocked out.

But sadly it has the same flaws of the F3: an inferior quality viewfinder image (compared to the later F2 cameras), tiny hard to read shutter speed, IMPOSSIBLY tiny "+/-" meter display that is a big insult to common sense, useless display illuminator (it always fail), an AE lock button that often falls out, no battery check (you either have enough power or you don't, and then you're stuck with only 1/80)...

But the biggest flaw of the F3 is that the meter's most critical component, the FRE, is made out of glass and is located below the hot shoe (rewind shaft). Thus, if you fit a dedicated flash and somebody knocks your flash, you risk breaking the glass FRE and rendering your meter useless.

It is as if Nikon was bought by another company and replaced their whole engineering staff with new guys that spent zero effort on looking back and understanding what made the F2 great.

The fact that the direct competitor, the Canon New F-1, has none of these flaws isn't even funny and makes me furious as a Nikon lens owner. Basically i can't get a good pro-quality AE camera from Nikon that is good for manual focus lenses, unless i pay a ton for a F6.

My F2S with upgraded screen has a brighter, clearer viewfinder than the F3 (regular finder) and F3P (with titanium HP finder) i had. The finder on the F2SB and AS is superior to the aforementioned F3 finders.

The need for a semi-transparent mirror on the F3 impairs the potential for viewfinder clarity.

While the F2S and F2AS had the most ideally placed and clearest meter display, the F3 display is a step backwards. And good luck in low light -- I haven't found a F3 with a working illuminator yet. And yes, i've read the user manual on how to activate it.

Sincerely, for me the F3 was a failed effort by Nikon. They could have improved on the F2 completely. In practice, they improved some things (ergonomics, TTL flash, better motor), but in others it's a step backwards. Many things i don't like about the F3, that's why I sold the ones i have including the coveted F3P. This time Canon almost completely won the battle with the New F-1 which is superior in all regards except for the lack of TTL flash meter, which might or might not matter to you. And maybe Pentax LX superior to all of them.

Most of the meat is here:

Nikon F3 vs F2 (My thoughts so far...)

So I recently purchased an F2 that had been recently CLAed and had new foam installed. I've shot an F3HP for years now- it is intuitive to the FE2 that I first started my Nikon journey with in 1993. There are many changes from the 2 to the 3. A lot of which I see as good changes. The screen...

www.photrio.com

 

[flavio81]

But just to name one out of a hundred, it was a Fuji 6x9 rangefinder. I was so looking forward to owning one. When it came out of the box, my wife and I looked at it and burst out laughing. It went right back in the box and back to KEH the next day.

That camera was BIG, comically big. Felt like I needed striped pants, a red nose and floppy shoes to use it. Even if I had taken a pic w/ it that got me on the cover of Life magazine, that wasn't enough to get me out of the house w/ that camera.

I received a fixed-lens Fuji 6x9, a GSW690 if i recall correctly, for some maintenance work. I had the option to buy it, since the owner wanted to sell it after service.

I did not like the internals, i expected better quality from something that says "Professional" on the outside.

The automatically adjusting field of view on the viewfinder framelines was a cool and useful feature, though. The viewfinder WAS professional, at least feature-wise.