In a case of SOGAS (that's "sudden onset gear acquisition syndrome"), I saw this at a thrift store for $2.99 and couldn't resist.
The Minolta 110 Zoom SLR. I was already into photography when this camera came out. They advertised it as though it were technology as advanced as a manned spacecraft. At the time, I saw little need for a camera of this price range that used 110 film, but, now, I was very curious to see what it will be like to use one. My last roll of Fujicolor Superia 200 size 110 escaped its 10+ years in the freezer as I loaded it. The batteries are very common 357/LR44/E13 button cells, so that is no problem. I did notice that with one set of batteries, the shutter did not always open when tripped, but with another pair, it seems to be reliable (this leads me to a question - with the battery check button, does the red arrow in the viewfinder mean the batteries are good or that the batteries are weak?).
Playing with the AE shutter showed an interesting curiosity. On very long exposures, the camera would be silent during most of the exposure, but, toward the end, a faint whine will be heard, increasing with volume and pitch, until it becomes a high-pitched whine just before the instant the shutter closes. This was very familiar to me - exactly the same sound is made when taking a long exposure on a Yashica Electro 35. Are the shutters in the 110 Zoom SLR and the Electro 35 somehow related?
The zoom lens seems to focus a sharp image on the tiny focusing screen. At first, I had though the microprism center focus was unusable, perhaps a consequence of the small format - then I made a discovery. When I backed my eye about 2" away from the eyepiece, the microprism worked as well as in any 35mm SLR I had ever used. It was when my eye was right to the eyepiece that the microprism looked like a useless checkerboard.
The find brought back memories of my use of 110 in the past. When 110 was new, I hated it, because the picture quality in the pictures taken by friends and relatives using 110, using the emulsions of the mid-1970s, was not good to my eyes. Oddly, I rediscovered 110 decades later, when I took a Pocket Instamatic 20, a junk store find, on a trip in 1995. The film had improved and quality was actually good, finally doing justice to the 20's triplet lens. Around the turn of this century, the films got even better (IMHO Superia 200 was best, but the EK product, even Gold 400, was not bad, either), and I shot several rolls with a Pocket Instamatic 60. The snapshots were quite good, indeed (note that at this time, I was also using both a Stereo camera and a 35mm SLR with slide film).
So, 110 was the format that was only good after it was just about dead in the marketplace. By the time Superia 200 and Gold were introduced, snapshooters everywhere had switched to 35mm point-and-shoots.
110 was also the format first and hardest hit by the digital revolution. Look what a 110 camera could do circa 2003 - it could take nice color print shots that could produce decent enlargments up to 8"x10" (20x25cm), or about 3-5 megapixels worth. Circa 2004, very compact digicams in the 3-5 MP range first became commonplace, and 110 quickly vanished.