Worst camera designs

[EASmithV]

Yes, like Graflex, Speed Graphic, Crown Graphic, View Graphic. All such terrible cameras!

I hope that was sarcastic

 

[E. von Hoegh]

Why is this camera so popular? I didn’t even take it seriously when I first saw it and still don’t.

Well, it can be a fashion statement, a hipster talisman, a "retro" statement, a "tool" for those who cannot make a sharp, properly focussed image with anything and therefore use a camera that is incapable of forming a sharp, properly focussed image; fools who've bought the hype that it makes 'dreamy" images, and so on.
It's very well marketed to a specific target (see above).

 

[E. von Hoegh]

I tried it and liked it, because it helped free my mind of all the clutter that is normally involved in shooting. It FORCED me to not meter, fudge the focus, and just 'see'.

For a while I even thought the vignette and focus fall-off was cool, but have since changed my mind about that, thinking that it's too much of a gimmick. Now I prefer a simple to use Leica, but am grateful to the 'plastic piece of $hit' because it taught me a valuable lesson regarding eliminating as many barriers between the subject matter and myself as possible.

For me, that lesson was learned with a Kodak 35, a cheap basic 35 that was capable of far better results than I at first realised. Coupled with an income derived from mowing the neighbors' lawns, it taught me to be miserly with frames and use a meter if I didn't want to waste what to me was very expensive film.

Edit - I didn't learn properly to "see" until I started using an 8x10, one lens, film, developer, and contact printing the results.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

For me, that lesson was learned with a Kodak 35, a cheap basic 35 that was capable of far better results than I at first realised. Coupled with an income derived from mowing the neighbors' lawns, it taught me to be miserly with frames and use a meter if I didn't want to waste what to me was very expensive film.

Edit - I didn't learn properly to "see" until I started using an 8x10, one lens, film, developer, and contact printing the results.

Film is pretty inexpensive, but I too remember a time where I had to look for deals to afford photography.

Sheet film was a huge disappointment to me; 4x5 and 5x7 was a total waste of time and money. I had to go back to medium format to save myself from being too technical and thinking too much. Funny how different we all are!

To counter the question of poor camera design, I think that the camera that allows presents the least amount of barriers between subject matter and the photographer's senses is the best one, and the worst one is a camera that completely clutters the work flow with considerations. The more intuitive it is to use, the better it is, and the more you have to think, the more it sucks.
But then again, practice makes perfect, so maybe with enough use any camera can be easy enough to shoot with... I think consistency matters, and something that seemed counter-intuitive to begin with can be a very good solution. For example, I love shooting my Hasselblad hand held. I would not have thought it when I got it, but now it's as obvious as day that we get along very well working together.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

For those who want the release on the left side, the Voigtlander Bessa II may be for you. I had one with a Heliar, loved the lens, and it was fine on a tripod or for verticals, but I found it too awkward to hold for horizontals--not that it was uncomfortable, but I was seeing more camera shake than I was happy with on the negs.

 

[Roger Cole]

I tried it and liked it, because it helped free my mind of all the clutter that is normally involved in shooting. It FORCED me to not meter, fudge the focus, and just 'see'.

For a while I even thought the vignette and focus fall-off was cool, but have since changed my mind about that, thinking that it's too much of a gimmick. Now I prefer a simple to use Leica, but am grateful to the 'plastic piece of $hit' because it taught me a valuable lesson regarding eliminating as many barriers between the subject matter and myself as possible.

But you can get the simplicity and lack of clutter and settings in other cameras that don't have the light leaks and build quality issues of the Holga.

My wife, then my girlfriend, bought me a Kodak Duaflex IV in nearly pristine condition for Christmas. I have it loaded with some re-spooled T-Max 100 now. I shot six frames and it's been sitting on frame 7 for months. I need to finish up the roll. This one has the drawback of having to buy re-spooled on 620 film or spool your own, but there are plenty of similar cameras that use 120. Not having developed this film yet I can't really comment on the lens in this thing but my guess would be that it's a substantial step up in sharpness and evenness from that in the Holga, and way below any other lens I own. But that's just a guess.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

But you can get the simplicity and lack of clutter and settings in other cameras that don't have the light leaks and build quality issues of the Holga.

My wife, then my girlfriend, bought me a Kodak Duaflex IV in nearly pristine condition for Christmas. I have it loaded with some re-spooled T-Max 100 now. I shot six frames and it's been sitting on frame 7 for months. I need to finish up the roll. This one has the drawback of having to buy re-spooled on 620 film or spool your own, but there are plenty of similar cameras that use 120. Not having developed this film yet I can't really comment on the lens in this thing but my guess would be that it's a substantial step up in sharpness and evenness from that in the Holga, and way below any other lens I own. But that's just a guess.

You are right, of course, that the Holga is perhaps not the ideal tool for this. But, it was 20 bucks and easy, and it was all I knew.

Any camera with the very simplest of functions, like film wind and a shutter release button, is going to be a good tool to learn to simply just reacting to what's in front of the camera, without thinking too much.

 

[E. von Hoegh]

Film is pretty inexpensive, but I too remember a time where I had to look for deals to afford photography.

Sheet film was a huge disappointment to me; 4x5 and 5x7 was a total waste of time and money. I had to go back to medium format to save myself from being too technical and thinking too much. Funny how different we all are!

To counter the question of poor camera design, I think that the camera that allows presents the least amount of barriers between subject matter and the photographer's senses is the best one, and the worst one is a camera that completely clutters the work flow with considerations. The more intuitive it is to use, the better it is, and the more you have to think, the more it sucks.
But then again, practice makes perfect, so maybe with enough use any camera can be easy enough to shoot with... I think consistency matters, and something that seemed counter-intuitive to begin with can be a very good solution. For example, I love shooting my Hasselblad hand held. I would not have thought it when I got it, but now it's as obvious as day that we get along very well working together.

When I got into large format in the mid 1980s it was a revelation to me. I started with a Linhof STIV three lens outfit, 90 - 150 - 270. After a year of that, I bought the 8x10 and it was another revelation, using just one lens and making contacts. For me, the 8x10 is as transparent as equipment gets when it comes to seeing, setting up, and making a photo. And, it has to be right the first time, there is no cropping a contact if you want the whole image. If I had to get rid of all my cmaeras but one, I would keep the 8x10. And the 4x5 back. And the Super-Rollex 6x7 roll back. And all the Dagors.

 

[E. von Hoegh]

You are right, of course, that the Holga is perhaps not the ideal tool for this. But, it was 20 bucks and easy, and it was all I knew.

Any camera with the very simplest of functions, like film wind and a shutter release button, is going to be a good tool to learn to simply just reacting to what's in front of the camera, without thinking too much.

Any Kodak folder with good bellows would be better than a Holga. A pinhole camera would be better than a Holga. They're the most unmitigated piece of photographic shit I've ever seen.

 

[cliveh]

I must admit, on this thread so far the Konica AiBORG is the most ugly camera I have ever seen. I don't think I could even pick it up, let alone use it.

 

[Sirius Glass]

RB too, David?

My Graflex Model D has a RB.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Yes, like Graflex, Speed Graphic, Crown Graphic, View Graphic. All such terrible cameras!

I hope that was sarcastic

Damn! You broke the code!

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

For me, the 8x10 is as transparent as equipment gets when it comes to seeing, setting up, and making a photo.

I totally agree with this, but I'm okay with cropping the contact print, if the world doesn't fit the frame. Strangely, I find that I sometimes crop 8x10" almost exactly to whole plate on the odd occasions I do crop. Or I might use the half-frame darkslide mask to make two 4x10's on a sheet. That said, 8x10" feels like pure photography to me.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

When I got into large format in the mid 1980s it was a revelation to me. I started with a Linhof STIV three lens outfit, 90 - 150 - 270. After a year of that, I bought the 8x10 and it was another revelation, using just one lens and making contacts. For me, the 8x10 is as transparent as equipment gets when it comes to seeing, setting up, and making a photo. And, it has to be right the first time, there is no cropping a contact if you want the whole image. If I had to get rid of all my cmaeras but one, I would keep the 8x10. And the 4x5 back. And the Super-Rollex 6x7 roll back. And all the Dagors.

I think it comes down to what it is that our eyes want to, and are trained to see. The problem I had with view cameras was that I felt I could not see. My wants in photography has a lot more to do with fleeting moments, seeing spatial relationships between static and moving objects, moments that never come back. I could never capture that with an 8x10, at least not as freely as I can with a Leica or even my Hasselblad. That, to me and my pictures, is seeing, to be able to react on an impulse, and that's another reason why even the Holga was useful to me. I don't sing its praises, but you can't deny it's simple and clutter free. Just point it in the general direction you wish to point it, at the right moment, and release the shutter. Repeat, and that's it. Some of my best work is done with a Holga. I just wish the film transport was more reliable.

And I realize it will not work for you.

 

[LJSLATER]

I LOVE the Nikon F4; the only thing I dislike about it is its dependence on batteries. I prefer to use it with the MB20, but it makes the battery life pretty short. Even so, it's one of my all-time favorite cameras.

The Nikon MD1 has an optional shutter release button on the front left-hand side that I use a lot. I am right-handed but left-eyed and I have other left-handed tendencies also. Unfortunately my brain is stupid so I'm not ambidextrous.

I think my most unpleasant experience with any camera was an Argus brick I found in a clothing store. I think the Argus is very adorable and aesthetically pleasing, but definitely NOT a joy to use or even to hold.

 

[andrew.roos]

I think my most unpleasant experience with any camera was an Argus brick I found in a clothing store. I think the Argus is very adorable and aesthetically pleasing, but definitely NOT a joy to use or even to hold.

Which goes to show you probably shouldn't purchase your cameras at clothing stores...

 

[LJSLATER]

Which goes to show you probably shouldn't purchase your cameras at clothing stores...

Yeah, well....

My wife was shopping for clothes at Anthropologie and I was bored. There it was on a little shelf, labeled as a "statement accessory". They even had some (Lomo) 35mm film for sale too, which I didn't buy.

 

[cliveh]

Wasn't there a camera called a seagull and would that fit into this post?

 

[Roger Cole]

Wasn't there a camera called a seagull and would that fit into this post?

There was (is?) a Chinese TLR called a Seagul. But I think it's more an example of bad build and bad materials than bad design. I've never actually seen one in person though so I could be wrong about that. But if they just copied the classics like the Rollei and Yashicamat the design is quite sound. The execution, however, could leave much to be desired if done poorly. About the best thing I've heard about the Seagull is that it isn't as bad as the Lubitel TLR.

The discussions of Russian cameras reminds me of a saying in aviation, "If it’s ugly, it’s British. If it’s weird, it’s French. And if it’s ugly and weird, it’s Russian."

 

[Newt_on_Swings]

I have the most recent seagull 4a-109, which was their top of the line 4 element taking lens version. It is a pretty much direct copy of a rolli or yashica d but with little ad ons like a hotshoe and split prism focusing.

The images are decent from it and far from a holga, though I do prefer the taking lens on my much older yashicaflex c. The manufacturing tolerances are lower and you can see it when looking closely, things just aren't ad smooth, from the fit and build, to the focusing, he'll even the split prism is slightly off from horizontal.

As for the Holga, if you check out the story behind it, and see the interview with the inventor, you can see how its build and design met its every original intention and then some. A simple to manufacture camera and lens, with very few parts, a low cost of production that did not need highly skilled labor to assemble. A camera for the masses in china.

 

[flatulent1]

The worst camera design to me is one where the interface gets in the way of taking pictures. I have two particular entries for that chamber of horrors, the Maxxum 7000 and the Contax 167MT. Shutter speed control on the 7000 is a pair of up/down buttons that had me so annoyed that I ditched the camera after only a few months. On the 167MT it's a slider switch; I tried using it for almost a year, but I could never remember which way to slide the switch to raise the shutter speed.

Besides those two, there are some other nits that bother me. The EOS 3 has the most obnoxious mirror slap/shutter/winder noise I've ever heard. The Minolta XE-7 has its power switch just under my right thumb where I was constantly turning the camera off while trying to take a picture. The Photura felt like a cheap plastic tube, and its flash/lens cap, while ingenious in concept, was poorly executed. The Canon New F-1 needing a change of focusing screen to change the metering pattern. Any camera that requires changing a custom function to engage mirror lock-up. The Canon T70 and T80 were just butt-ugly. The Minolta Riva Zoom 105i... words fail me.

The Nikon F4s is a special case. Its 'silent mode' is beyond ridiculous. It has a vast assortment of interlocks that prevent you from changing anything without stopping what you're doing. Its batteries go in two different locations. Screw-drive AF. The list goes on, and yet it's one of my favorite cameras. I hated having to sell mine, and fully intend to get another when finances improve.

 

[cowanw]

While having a leaf shutter on a 35mm slr was nice, I could never remember to set the max aperture for the lens on the camera body, every time I switched lenses on my Topcon Unirex.
needing a mercury battery is a bummer too.

 

[cliveh]

As this thread seems to be also picking up on bad design functions on cameras. How about the Vivitar 35mm, which has a double exposure button on the front right where you normally place your index finger. Why arn't cameras designed by photographers and not marketing people?

 

[epp]

Why is this camera so popular? I didn’t even take it seriously when I first saw it and still don’t.

The Holga is an inexpensive introduction to medium-format film photography.

 

[Discoman]

There was (is?) a Chinese TLR called a Seagul. But I think it's more an example of bad build and bad materials than bad design. I've never actually seen one in person though so I could be wrong about that. But if they just copied the classics like the Rollei and Yashicamat the design is quite sound. The execution, however, could leave much to be desired if done poorly. About the best thing I've heard about the Seagull is that it isn't as bad as the Lubitel TLR.

The discussions of Russian cameras reminds me of a saying in aviation, "If it’s ugly, it’s British. If it’s weird, it’s French. And if it’s ugly and weird, it’s Russian."

I have a Seagull 4B-1 (I assume, everything else is in Chinese).and it is actually a fairly good design. Very simple, very easy to use. Has a cocking lever to set the shutter, and uses the red window and knob arrangement to advance the film. Very little to go wrong. Sadly, questionable build quality means stuff may go wrong. The focus on mine is pretty out of alignment, to the point the camera doesn't close, and the leatherette is peeling quite badly. Other than that it works flawlessly.
Good camera to introduce someone to MF with.