Most disappointing cameras?

[railwayman3]

Had (and still have) a 35mm Minox GT which continues to work well and is convenient for the pocket....but I've always felt that it was of a very delicate constuction and treated it accordingly! The automatic exposure isn't accurate enough for color slide, and can only be over-ridden by fiddling with the film speed index.

Also bought various s/h 9.5mm Minox stuff about 10 years ago, I'd always wanted to try the system and liked the idea of such a tiny quality camera. Never used it properly (lack of time, not the camera's fault!) and then soon after I acquired (for work needs) a tiny digital one to keep in my pocket as a "notebook". So, with 35mm and 120 for my own photography, the Minox isn't really needed now.

Assuming you mean a camera that was not bought with issues, I'd vote for the Minox ML. Got it new and it was a camera I could have kept and used as a main camera for life but, the shutter failed twice. The original design was failure prone I learned later. When mine failed the first time, I sent it to Minox and paid for a new shutter than was an improved version correcting the problem. Sadly, it did not last as long as the 1st and when I contacted Minox they'd not replace it under warranty or give any consideration since it was the 2nd failure. The camera when working was magnificent with one of the best lenses I'd ever used. The zone focusing was no problem and unlike the other Minox 35 models you could hold the exposure and reframe. I understand there was again a redesign and the TDC version is not failure prone but by the time it came out I had sold off the camera and all the acc'ys which was everything Minox had available for it, except the little tripod that I kept.

Another disappointment was the Olympus XA. Took good photos and nothing really wrong with it but I just never could warm up to it. Nothing I could point out but, just never cared for it.

Another was the Minox 16mm cameras. I had a B, C, EC and LX. All excellent cameras. Still have the C. Bitch is it seemed right after I got hooked, the Minox distribution in the US dived in quality and prices for film and development went through the roof. Also, film selection nose dived. Again loved the cameras and lenses except for the EC.

Polaroid pack cameras: Hated the results from all the various models I tried until I learned that these were not actually hand holders as shown in all the adverts and literature. I finally figured out they needed a tripod or at least the self-timer or cable release to get decent results. Only exception was with the ISO 3000 b&w with the 180 and 195 and ND filter.

 

[Klainmeister]

I second the Mamiya 7/7II.

-Body is really cheap feeling
-The film curtain is awkward to operate and feels like its gonna break
-The offset tripod mount means I can't change film without loosening my tripod shoe

But god do I love the negatives......

 

[blockend]

Early AF SLRs, e.g. The Minolta 600 and Nikon 501 and 601. Evolution occurs faster than the Minolta focusses and to compound the issue the kit zoom is dark. I paid almost nothing for a box of three and that was too much. The Nikon 601 is not a bad camera but one of mine shed a shutter just outside warranty and when I hadn't used them for two years I found the door catches had fallen off (an endemic problem apparently). A friend had a 501 which he tried to replace and was told it was functioning correctly. If it doesn't think it's focussed it won't allow you to operate the shutter. And it never focusses.

An Olympus XA2 was a real dog, not especially sharp, vignetted heavily and felt like it fell out a Christmas cracker. Some people swear by their's.

A Nikon F2AS. Hard to say why, I loved my plain prism F. It's big, heavy and reliable and I always wanted one when they were live but it felt like dating an old sweetheart 30 years on - it was never going to work. I still have it but don't use it.

 

[darinwc]

Regarding the Olympus Stylus Epic: They suffer the same fate as all point-and-shoot cameras: The flash.
The flash on compact cameras (and some built-in flashes on SLR's) is weak and is located really close to the lens.

An underpowered flash means you only get about 3-5 feet of usable flash befoer it foes black. And it is hard to get good fill-flash in bright sun.

Since the flash is so close to the lens, you often get red-eye. And the shots just look ugly and un-natural as well. The (relatively) large-aperture lens does help, but the flash is turned on by default. This is really agrivating.

So while I think the Stylus Epic and Yashica T4 are the best of their class, there are some limitations in their basic design that really make them fall short of being a replacement for a pro camera.

 

[ColdEye]

Mine is the zenit 122. Its large and clunky, shutter sounds bad and it just doesn't fit right in my hands.

 

[perkeleellinen]

Just curious, what is disappointing with Leica M's? Excepting meter and the price.

Really the contrast between what I had heard about them and my experience. For example the 'silent' shutter that isn't silent. The film advance that is like 'a hot knife through butter' which isn't like a hot knife through butter. The ease of use and simplicity which ignores the arcane film loading procedure.

 

[MattKing]

It is a tie between two lost cameras:

Cameras 7a and 7b in the Travelling Camera forum.

I'm convinced that they are somewhere together, hiding from us all!

 

[vpwphoto]

Leica CL... shutter kept dragging when it was 40° F and below... had it fixed at great cost and it still did it.

 

[removed account4]

never really had a camera that disappointed me ..

 

[coigach]

I second the Mamiya 7/7II.

-Body is really cheap feeling
-The film curtain is awkward to operate and feels like its gonna break
-The offset tripod mount means I can't change film without loosening my tripod shoe

But god do I love the negatives......

I actually really like my Mamiya 7ii, but I agree with the offset tripod mount issue. Really annoying

 

[Klainmeister]

I actually really like my Mamiya 7ii, but I agree with the offset tripod mount issue. Really annoying

Oh don't get me wrong, I love it, but could you imagine the feel of the camera with a metal body? Droooool

 

[warrennn]

Another vote for the Leica M series. After owning a Nikon F for a few years, I bought a mint condition M3 in 1969 and found it to be a great disappointment (in an era when it was far less hyped than it is now). I found the build quality mediocre (lots of stamped metal parts) and I hated the primitive film loading/rewinding procedure. I made several trips to the Leica repair facility to vertically align the rangefinder; it never stayed aligned (I was extremely careful in my handling of the camera). I sold it in 1972 for $250 and felt palpable relief when I resumed using my Nikon F.

(The cult surrounding these cameras is extremely annoying, but that is a subject for a different thread.)

Warren Nagourney

 

[GumPhoto]

Rollei sl66. Maybe I just got two lemons, but they were the most break-prone things I ever owned.

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

Olympus XA. I heard wonderful things about how sharp the lens was and was then consistently disappointed with the results.

Ditto - sold it on, hope you didn't get mine. I can only speculate that lens performance varied widely sample-to-sample - or many peoples' standard of comparison is a $5 disposable.

I would agree that the XA is a camera that really, really disappointed me.

I found Feds & Zorkis to be pretty bad, but my expectations weren't very high. I think if I had bought a refurbed camera I would have been - well, I wouldn't have thrown them out.

I have to agree about Leica M3's, just not a very good camera. But I have an M5 that I find to be almost-superb - the shutter release stroke is too long with too much pressure, what with moving the CdS cell out of the way.

 

[mesh]

Dare I say another vote for the Leica M3... It's been my dream camera for many years but in the four months I've owned it, I've been without it for three, and it's cost me about $1000 to get it (almost) working properly. Bad luck? Dunno. Still I WILL absolutely love it when it's going well. Stunning camera to use but are Leica's really the pinnacle of reliability? Well my Leica CL was a bit temperamental and I only ever hear about digital M reliability issues... it's interesting. So my favourite camera of all time is a kind of dissapointment.

My least favourite camera I have ever used is the Nikon F70 - what a friggin awful user interface! F80 and above are stunners though.

 

[parkpy]

thank you all.

I no longer want a Leica M3.

I'll shoot with what I have

 

[Andrew Moxom]

Canham 45 DLC.... It was great at first, but living in MN, the camera would not lock up tight in the winter! I would set up a shot, go to put in the film holder and just opening the back to insert the film holder and the tension of the spring on the film back gate would cause the rear standard to move out of whack! Not was I was expecting for what was supposed to be a solid camera.... I sold it for a Chamonix and had change for an additional lens!

 

[chriscrawfordphoto]

Oh for me it is a Seagull TLR. I liked the shots I got from it but the shutter died after a few rolls from almost new!

Same thing happened to me with a Seagull TLR. Total junk, which was too bad because the lens on mine (the 4 element lens) was SUPER SHARP.

 

[Steve Smith]

never really had a camera that disappointed me ..

I think I am more likely to disappoint my cameras.


Steve.

 

[rphenning]

Oh don't get me wrong, I love it, but could you imagine the feel of the camera with a metal body? Droooool

thing would be heavier than a brick if you replaced all the plastic with metal. That being said I can third the off-set tripod mount and it being annoying. Quick plate and a dremel fixed that real quick though!

 

[jacksond]

Voigtlander R3A. The shutter jammed twice within a couple of weeks. I'll stick to the Leicas. I do agree about the cult thing however. Similar to the Apple religion.

 

[perkeleellinen]

Similar to the Apple religion.

I was thinking of just this earlier.

 

[darkosaric]

I like take pictures more with Nikon F3 than with my Leica cameras - but I think this is mainly because I prefer SLR over rangefinders. Is there anyone who has bad disappointing opinion about Leicas but likes and uses rangefinders, and prefer rangefinders over SLR?

 

[Tony Egan]

Horizon 202. Noise, flare, distortion, uneven exposure, hilarious midget filter set. Sold it after a few months. Good for a few laughs and scaring a few tourists.

Don't like to pour any more fuel on the anti Leica M fire as it gets some people a bit red-cheeked but I have never really warmed to my M6. Least favourite of my 35mm cameras after F4, OM1 and XPan. Probably more like disinterested than disappointed.

 

[warrennn]

I do agree about the cult thing however. Similar to the Apple religion.

It is interesting that you compare the Leica and Apple cults -- Steve Jobs compared the iPhone 4 to a Leica when he introduced the former.

(Actually, I use Apple products and like them, but I agree that the cult surrounding them is both annoying and helps keep the prices high.)