Your favorite camera that you do not want to buy?

aizan said:
Film

Bronica RF645
Love the style and feel of it, but I already have a Fuji GS645 that's probably going to be easier to repair if needed.

Nikon SP black paint (also Contax IIa)
They look damn cool, titanium shutter, less maintenance, wide angle finder, but again, I already have a Leica M that has far more variety in lens options. "Universal" lens mounts make me happy.

Leica II black paint and nickel or IIIF
Beautiful but not so practical. Since prices for M-mount cameras are nuts, I might give them another try to play devil's advocate.

Phillips 8x10 Compact II and Gandolfi 8x10 Traditional
Too expensive and rare. =(

Horseman VH
They're cute. They have movements. They're cheap. I don't know why I haven't gotten one, aside from already having other 6x9 (more convenient) and 4x5 cameras (more neg).

Hasselblad XPan
Too expensive and not really what I want (too electronic).

Contax point and shoots
Too scared of expensive paper weights. I'd rather get plenty of Konica Big Minis.



Digital



Olympus E-1
The design, build, and feel is top notch. But would I use such an old digital camera?

Ricoh GR III
No EVF! My pockets are big enough. I want that 28mm-e.

Alpa 12 STC and Phase One IQ4 back / Leica S / Hasselblad 907X
I'd have to sell a kidney. Preferably not my own.

Leica M10
If they took care of a few pesky details, then I could justify the price.
Click to expand...


I had a Phillips compact which I paired with a 24 inch pro tar triple.

Sold it to a young pro. Regret
 
As of late 2020, I choose:


Sony RX1R II, because I'm probably kidding myself that I'd be satisfied with just this one camera with it's built-in 35mm lens, but wouldn't it be a heck of experiment into a super pared-down camera outfit.


Leica M10: I like how they've brought back the classic M proportions and seem to have solved technical issues from the M240 onward. But as of 2020, I seem to have mostly made my peace with modernity as long as I can turn off notifications and don't need to log in with a Facebook account. And unlike 2007 when I took delivery of my M8, today there are a lot of compact cameras with big sensors to choose from, most with parallax-free finders.


Sigma FP: Looks like a very cool, very tiny little camera. But I think it's real purpose is as cinema camera, where it can be mounted into a cage and outfitted with HDMI monitor.


Ducati Sogno: Love the looks and think it would be fun, but maybe not $800 worth of fun.


Kowa SW: What a beauty! But it doesn't seem especially cheap at $200, let alone $400+.
 
Contax G2 with the 28 and the 45.
But ... it uses film, so, no.


2010 Canyongazer would shake his head in horror at that attitude.
 
RichC said:
Film: the Jaeger-LeCoultre Compass.
Digital: Epson R-D1

Both are superlative feats of engineering. Both are hopelessly fragile and and impractical. Both are hopelessly obsolete. And I want them.

I actually owned the Epson R-D1 and had a well-known website on it - now donated to RFF's owner: here.

attachment.php


attachment.php
Click to expand...

I don't know about the Jaeger-Lecoultre, but I've had moments of wanting to get the Epson. It's the crop factor that stops me, together with maintenance headaches. A very cool camera, otherwise. Even the 6MP file size wouldn't worry me.
 
Papercut said:
Hasselblad SWC. Brilliant camera, fantastic image quality. But, just too expensive and I just never seem to use my medium format cameras enough to justify them. ...
Click to expand...

You may be surprised by how much you'd use it. I bought one over 25 years ago for some projects I had. Normally, I dislike anything wider than 28mm in 135 format and the SWC's 38mm Biogon was a 24mm equivalent. Well, there is something about the SWC's images... Sure, it's perfectly rectilinear at the edges, as advertised, but there's some other magic happening. Anyway, I've used my SWC much more than my 500-series.


Kai-san said:
The Olympus Pen FT. It's such a nice camera, but I hate half frame! It takes forever to finish off a film!
Click to expand...

You might also be surprised. I'd never liked the idea of half-frame, didn't like a portrait-orientation default, and often think even 24 frames are too much. But just a few years ago I bought a Pen FT and quickly changed my mind.

I was attracted to the camera for non-photographic reasons initially: the rotary shutter sounded addictively wonderful, it looked nice, and I knew nothing like this would ever be made again. That last thought has often been the catalyst for me spending money.

Yet, when I put film in it and went for a walk, thinking I'd make maybe two photos, I suddenly discovered that the portrait view through the camera changed the way I looked at the familiar neighborhood I've lived in and photographed for so long. Everything seemed correct in the viewfinder - I saw possibilities I hadn't seen before. I finished the near 48 shots in less than an hour, went home, loaded another roll, went out, and finished that roll. The results were spectacular.

OK, so for my choices:

For film, I've wanted an XD-11 but I'm worried about their reliability and whether anyone would, or could, repair one.

For digital, I can't decide between a Fuji XT-n model or X100n model to go with my X-Pro1. Yet I really don't need one, so can't justify the expense.
 
Hasselblad XPan. The electronics always put me off, especially now considering the current prices. I ended up buying a 903SWC instead, the FoV with an A16 back is actually very close and I have some room to shift the crop up or down.
 
Fujifilm X-pro3
Beautiful materials, good looking camera, breath-taking JPEG colors, useful webcam function (for my kind of work). But extremely stupid OVF that doesn't have the 28mm-equivalent of framelines. Perfect with the XF18mm F2 but won't support it properly. One 35mm-equivalent lens (XF23mm F2) will disable frameline when focused on infinity. Pretty ironic for a camera that emphasizes the use of OVF and 'pure' photography. :cool:

Contax II
Owned it briefly after reading Slightly Out of Focus. Beautiful camera and unique, fantastic lens for black and white. Trouble is, it's not easy to find someone to repair or maintain it without paying a lot 10 years from now. I miss it sometimes, but happily shooting the sonnar lens using Amedeo's adaptor.

Mamiya 7 II
Love the format and the image it draws. Current going price is ridiculous and again, hard to find someone to repair the electronics.
 
Pentax 645d, I like the rendition colour wise of my CCD based cameras and the larger format apeals big time. I just don't think I would be bothered to carry it out often due to the weight and just don't like walking around with expensive gear.
Leica M9 for the same expense reason and added to it the sensor issues, actually I would take one to a good few places.
 
gaheris said:
Fujifilm X-pro3
Beautiful materials, good looking camera, breath-taking JPEG colors, useful webcam function (for my kind of work). But extremely stupid OVF that doesn't have the 28mm-equivalent of framelines. Perfect with the XF18mm F2 but won't support it properly. One 35mm-equivalent lens (XF23mm F2) will disable frameline when focused on infinity. Pretty ironic for a camera that emphasizes the use of OVF and 'pure' photography. :cool:
Click to expand...

Does it really emphasize the OVF or just provide multiple ways to frame your image? To me, it is just one of 3 options to frame with.
 
jsrockit said:
Does it really emphasize the OVF or just provide multiple ways to frame your image? To me, it is just one of 3 options to frame with.
Click to expand...

I would find it slightly odd if the OVF is just another option but not a feature that helps the X-PRO line to stand out, especially with X-PRO 3 has a hidden LCD that encourages people to look through the finder.
 
Digital, there's nothing I really lust after.

But for film, I would really love to have an 1920's Ernemann Ermanox with the massive 105/1.8 Ernostar attached to it (supposed forerunner of the Sonnar).

It seems pretty impossible to zone focus, and I have no desire to focus on a ground glass and then switch to a 6x4.5 piece of sheet film. That seems very tedious for what should be a handheld camera.

I know there is an Ermanox Reflex, but it just doesn't get me like the svelte Ermanox with the glass finder.

Pacific Rim has a good overview here:
https://www.pacificrimcamera.com/pp/ziermanox.htm
 
seany65 said:
I want, and would probably never buy, a Rolleiflex SL26 126 camera and the 3 lenses, as the only film available is decades out of date, and even though it's possibly to put 35mm film in the cartridges, you end up with film sprockets on the pics. I suppose it would be possible to print them without the sprocket holes, but there would probably be some faffing about to do.
Click to expand...

Well, THAT didn't go to plan! I've now got 3 of the ruddy things. It's a complicated story of why, so I won't go into it. All three have "bits" in the viewfinder (I presume mirror dampening foam) but one has a little dead bug in it. I also have two 80mm lenses, one of which has a small scratch on the front element but otherwise both look near mint. I also have a 28mm but it has what looks like a small semicircle of tiny sparkly dots at the edge of the inside of the front element and a smaller one above and behind but inverted as though it could be a reflection.

With the original price of this system, you'd think Rollei could come up with a better rear lens cap system than just basically, "turn the lens upside and balance the cap on the rear and then hope it doesn't drop off".
 
I want a Rollei SL66. To me, it's the ultimate 6x6 SLR; Zeiss lenses, impeccable quality, lens movements, and, oh yeah, gorgeous! Also, expensive as all hell, and reputedly as cranky as me. With three (!) 6x6 SLR systems in play, there's no way I can justify it to myself, but oh, would I love to have one...
 
RichC said:
Film: the Jaeger-LeCoultre Compass.
Digital: Epson R-D1

Both are superlative feats of engineering. Both are hopelessly fragile and and impractical. Both are hopelessly obsolete. And I want them.

I actually owned the Epson R-D1 and had a well-known website on it - now donated to RFF's owner: here.

attachment.php


attachment.php
Click to expand...

That JLC is a must-have in dreams. Yes! And on eBay for ~US$4500. I can rationalize a lot of strange cameras but as much as I would love to have one of these, even though it is film, my ego does not stretch that far. Thankfully.

But imagine the next get-together of camera nerds when you fish this out of your pocket. And just looking at it up on the shelf, behind glass. Oh, my. I kind of wish I had not seen it. ;o)

In keeping with what is really available for purchase, a Leica IIIf or IIIg would be nice and/or an M2 or M3. Just for the gorgeous mechanism and the rare roll of film.

Non-camera? My old '67 BMW R69S, sn 662191, frame and engine. Best motorcycle I ever had, rode it from coast to coast. What a ride. But at my age another motorcycle would just be a ride to the undertaker.
 
Last edited:
mod2001 said:
I hear(d) this argument quit often and could follow this thought in the beginning of digital, but nowadays, what makes you think it will be obsolete? Does the same camera make bad photos in a few years?

Juergen
Click to expand...

I have a 25 year old Sony DSC S70 that still captures great pics with its tiny sensor.
 
I force myself not to buy Yet-Another-Hasselblad-SWC. I've owned and loved two of them, would love another but I simply will not spend the money for it again. Much as I love it, I just don't use it enough to be worth the still-appreciable price tag.

That covers both film and digital for me, since I have A12, A16, and CFVII-50c backs that would work on it. ;)

G
 
Alpa 12 TC with Phase One digital back. Cost of entry was too high even with just one lens, and technology was still in its infancy. I was right because as sensor resolution improved people I knew got on the Phase One update program and kept up with new $6000 lenses. Some came back from trips with extraordinary photos so I guess it’s worth it if you had the skills. I went backwards and bought a Rolleiflex TLR.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom