Most disappointing cameras?

Vilk · Sep 7, 2011

Mustafa Umut Sarac said:
They were mechanically working but I prefer a zenit and kiev to them. Lenses were horrible.

Mustafa Umut Sarac said:
Leica cameras are a school and teach you your next move.

that may well be, but most people eventually graduate and take responsibility for their next move... and that's when they chuck their "school" cameras and get a nikon, no?

have i just swallowed some bait or something? this can't be real...

mbsmith · Sep 7, 2011

Most disappointing?

My DSLR

Reason: Couldn't ever figure out how to load the film, and the manual wasn't much help either.

Ian Grant · Sep 7, 2011

Re entering the foray, my most disappointing camear was my Prakticamat bought as a teenager, most people don;t realise these were the first TTL meter cameras on sale they jsut beat Pentax Spotmatic's by a few months. Actually the camera body and metering were excellent always reliable however the CZJ f1.8 Pancolor lens had mechanical issues, it was extremely sharp but the auto diaphram wouldn't stop down consistently, with other lenses the camera was fine.

Ian

fstop · Sep 7, 2011

Vilk said:
that may well be, but most people eventually graduate and take responsibility for their next move... and that's when they chuck their "school" cameras and get a nikon, no?

have i just swallowed some bait or something? this can't be real...

I always thought the camera was our obedient servant, not our schoolmaster.The camera does not see the picture, it only records it to our specifications and then only if its within its capability.
However I did learn one thing from Canned A-1 and AE-1 program I owned, I don't like them.

Aristophanes · Sep 7, 2011

fstop said:
I always thought the camera was our obedient servant, not our schoolmaster.The camera does not see the picture, it only records it to our specifications and then only if its within its capability.
However I did learn one thing from Canned A-1 and AE-1 program I owned, I don't like them.

Was the feeling mutual?

The divorce amicable?

fstop · Sep 7, 2011

For the most part, I repaired both, both had Canon "squeal". cleaned both so they looked as good as possible and got a fair buck for them on ebay. But both , especially the A-1 was disappointing due to low high end shutter speed, cloth shutter overall cheap plastic feel.

Sirius Glass · Sep 7, 2011

fstop said:
For the most part, I repaired both, both had Canon "squeal". cleaned both so they looked as good as possible and got a fair buck for them on ebay. But both , especially the A-1 was disappointing due to low high end shutter speed, cloth shutter overall cheap plastic feel.

Spoken like a true Nikon man!

Aristophanes · Sep 7, 2011

fstop said:
For the most part, I repaired both, both had Canon "squeal". cleaned both so they looked as good as possible and got a fair buck for them on ebay. But both , especially the A-1 was disappointing due to low high end shutter speed, cloth shutter overall cheap plastic feel.

I feel the same with Canon DSLR line. Pick them up and they are good machines with all the right tools, but they scream "consumer electronics" if one side-by-sides them with a Nikon (or even a Pentax). Nikon feels more "engineered".

Some disappointments never change.

Sparky · Sep 7, 2011

hmmmm... disappointing cameras - ARCA SWISS, LINHOF, RZ-67 II, MAKINA 67, lower end Nikons (i.e. the more plasticky later ones), all come to mind... for various reasons

blockend · Sep 8, 2011

For twenty years I was a card carrying Nikon user. Two things lead me to look at Canon, firstly the weight of metal bodied cameras, second the price and weight of Nikkor lenses. I still use my Nikons if the mood takes me but my usual rig is two A-series Canons (colour + mono) and a compact video camera. This all fits in a bag about the size of a small loaf of bread and I never miss a shot because I lack a lens, or film stock or movie.

BTW, I've had a Nikon metal shutter disintegrate just out of warranty and two friend's FE/FMs went the same way. No camera is perfect.

fstop · Sep 8, 2011

Sirius Glass said:
Spoken like a true Nikon man!

I'm not a Nikon man. I use Nikon because because F2's and F3s are cheap like @#$% compared Minolta XK's, plus I'm not so hard headed to ignore a tool that works.
Nikon is more economical to use than highend Minolta bodies. I prefer Rokkor glass to anything except Zeiss also.
Owning a Nikon is like owning a BMW, its well made, but carries a label that is objectionable due to snobbish zealots owning them only because they think it is some status symbol.

Paul VanAudenhove · Sep 9, 2011

"Owning a Nikon is like owning a BMW, its well made, but carries a label that is objectionable due to snobbish zealots owning them only because they think it is some status symbol."

Interesting comparison: both brands made products for users, and both brands gained popularity (recognition) in the general public's mind.

I should also point out that both companies make some great products, but have also developed a reputation as status symbols.

Ian Grant · Sep 9, 2011

Paul VanAudenhove said:
"Owning a Nikon is like owning a BMW,

The Nikon F series is more like a Land Rover well made and always serviceable but not sleek and elegant, over sized and bulky. The FM's etc are the Range Rover equivalents, the Topco was the Jeep equivalent

The Pentax LX is more like a BMW the Canon F a Mercedes, the Contax a Porsche but then the stying was by Porsche anyway originally. Zenit's were like Lada's and Praktica's like Skoda's.

Ian

removed account4 · Sep 9, 2011

MattKing said:
John:

I think you need to drink some good coffee

yeah ...
you are probably right ..
i'll have to look out for some Dead Link Removed unfortunately it tastes like $--t

bdial · Sep 9, 2011

i'll have to look out for some Kopi Luwak

Hmm, I haven't seen Starbucks feature that yet. I wonder why?

fstop · Sep 9, 2011

Ian Grant said:
The Nikon F series is more like a Land Rover well made and always serviceable but not sleek and elegant, over sized and bulky. The FM's etc are the Range Rover equivalents, the Topco was the Jeep equivalent

The Pentax LX is more like a BMW the Canon F a Mercedes, the Contax a Porsche but then the stying was by Porsche anyway originally. Zenit's were like Lada's and Praktica's like Skoda's.

Ian

Land Rovers wish they had such a sterling reputation for performing in damp conditions as the F.
I disagree on the appearance of the Land Rover, I think they are a handsome vehicle.

tomalophicon · Sep 9, 2011

Land Rovers and the phrase well-made shouldn't appear in the same sentence!

I owned a 110 Defender and it was hard to live with. Maybe like an F? Not sure, I use OMs
I have a Discovery now and I'm much happier

Aristophanes · Sep 9, 2011

fstop said:
Land Rovers wish they had such a sterling reputation for performing in damp conditions as the F.
I disagree on the appearance of the Land Rover, I think they are a handsome vehicle.

Designed by a Scotsman to be rugged because he wisely put the spare wheel on the hood impeding the view of the rocks one is about to smash the axle over!

Rol_Lei Nut · Sep 10, 2011

Ian Grant said:
Mine [Leica M] surparassed the eulogies.

Ian

+1

Wade D · Sep 10, 2011

Petri Flex V. I bought one new in high school and the shutter died in only 4 years. I had it repaired and it lasted another 6 months. My Exakta VX, on the other hand, is like my Jeep ZJ. I beat the hell out of it and it asks for more!

fmajor · Sep 10, 2011

I do alot of research before buying a camera so i'm not usually disappointed in a large-scale way. However, i have been disappointed with the 'way' a camera works (not that it doesn't work well, just not my preference) in accord with my preferences.

To wit, i really, really, really like my Minolta XD-11 - it is the smoothest, sleekest camera i've ever owned. It fits in my hand very well, has A/S/M exposure modes (the 1st 35mm SLR to have all 3) - though i only use M mode. I replaced the original camera covering with some awesome stuff from cameraleather.com (GripTac - LOVE IT!!!!!!! )and it's simply excellent in-hand. The viewfinder is crazy bright and clear - love it.

However, i just don't get on with the LED shutter speed 'read-out' in the viewfinder. I strongly prefer the match-needle system of my Minolta SRT102/202 cameras. I feel i can get a better understanding of far over/under exposed i'm going than what the 'exacting' LED read-out tells me. I can't see just how far in-between shutter speeds/exposure i actually am. Kinda like a speedometer in a car with only 10MPH graduations instead of an analogue dial which shows every subtle change in speed.

Also, when the mirror is released in the XD-11 i can *feel* it. It probably doesn't affect the image, but it's disconcerting to me.

I feel like a traitor. The XD-11 is a magnificient camera - i just don't get along with the exposure LED communication nor the too-light-weight (for me) camera body.

I had 2 of these (CLA'ed - and pretty much perfect), but sold one to help fund my Mamiya RB67. I also have an XD-5 needing a film-spool replacement in as-new condition, but am keeping it for one of my kids.

blockend · Sep 10, 2011

fmajor said:
I strongly prefer the match-needle system

The two most useful metering types are aperture priority auto with exposure lock + viewfinder info, and match needle manual, in my experience.

C A Sugg · Sep 10, 2011

Yashica FR. First off a piece of grit in the take-up chamber was painted over during manufacture and was still sharp enough to make a deep scratch into the base of the film. (sanded that down) Then there was the battery drain when off. Worst of it was that it would reach a point where it would still meter and cycle, but the shutter wouldn't time. I found out about that lovely feature after shooting a wedding. And it used a 6 volt silver oxide battery. I got it just before the silver speculators did their thing.

Rol_Lei Nut · Sep 10, 2011

Sirius Glass said:
I am very comfortable with range finder cameras, but I do not like the limitations in focal lengths. 135mm is just not long enough for some of the work I do. Does that make it a bad camera? No, but it is not the right tool for some people.

Which is why, when I need to use longer focal lengths, do macro or other situations where an SLR shines, oddly enough I reach for an SLR...

But I also find, in the right situations and within it's capabilities, a Leica M or other good RF camera also shines.

It's not either/or, just use both as needed!

Selidor · Sep 10, 2011

To wit, i really, really, really like my Minolta XD-11 - it is the smoothest, sleekest camera i've ever owned. It fits in my hand very well, has A/S/M exposure modes (the 1st 35mm SLR to have all 3) - though i only use M mode. I replaced the original camera covering with some awesome stuff from cameraleather.com (GripTac - LOVE IT!!!!!!! )and it's simply excellent in-hand. The viewfinder is crazy bright and clear - love it.

However, i just don't get on with the LED shutter speed 'read-out' in the viewfinder. I strongly prefer the match-needle system of my Minolta SRT102/202 cameras. I feel i can get a better understanding of far over/under exposed i'm going than what the 'exacting' LED read-out tells me. I can't see just how far in-between shutter speeds/exposure i actually am. Kinda like a speedometer in a car with only 10MPH graduations instead of an analogue dial which shows every subtle change in speed.

I was going to say the XD-7/11 too. My copy has slowly revealed an African Hornets nest of issues, including but not limited to:

- Battery drain; drained a brand new Duracell set within 2 1/2 days.
- Shutter lag; by the end of a 36 roll it was over 10 seconds. (!)
- Irratic meter; only half of the 36 roll were properly exposed. The rest were under-exposed to varying degrees.

In short, it's totally unusable as a photographic tool. I dont know what to do with it, Im not sure how much it'll fetch like this...if theres one silver lining its that the leatherette miraculously hasn't shrunk at all.

I also dont like the LED meter execution. I prefer the way Canon do it in the A1/AE1, but neither outdoes a classic match needle, as you said.

Furthermore the veiwfinder ticks me off. Sure its bright, but has poor eye relief, speaking as an eyeglasses wearer. I've tried Nikon's high eyepoint type and they for me remain the gold standard, but the OM series and AE-1 Program are pretty good. Minolta seems to have gone the opposite way and made a "low eyepoint" style, to better fit the body shape. I noticed it in the 7000 too.

The whole experience was gutting, to be honest, to have such anticipation slowly transfigured into a hollow sadness . Its put me off ALL pre-80's cameras entirely. Next time I'll just buy a black FM2 and be done with it. Variety may be the spice of life, but only if those spices work!

Most disappointing cameras?

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency