disapointment/overated kit

[ChrisLivsey]

The Barnack Leicas: Beautifully made cameras and they look so nice but using them is a pain in the bum. Squinty viewfinders, separate view/range finder, rotating shutter dial and difficult loading procedure.

Some of us shoot a Barnack for precisely those reasons, we enjoy a challenge. The satisfaction of obtaining decent results despite the "inconvenience" is rewarding. What joy is there in shooting in "P" mode with autofocus?

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

Some of us shoot a Barnack for precisely those reasons, we enjoy a challenge. The satisfaction of obtaining decent results despite the "inconvenience" is rewarding. What joy is there in shooting in "P" mode with autofocus?

Using equipment that gets in your way is dumb. I never, ever shoot in P mode, or any other autoexposure mode, and I rarely use AF.

Some cameras are easy to use, so much so that you can concentrate on the image, even shooting full manual. Others are designed in such a way that they inconvenience you.

An example: Nikon, back in the 80s, had basically two lines of 35mm SLRs. The F3 and F4 were the pro models. The FM, FM2, FE, FE2, and FA were the amateur models.

They all used the same Nikon F-mount lens system, and there was no image quality difference between the high-priced pro models and the moderately priced amateur models.

There was a HUGE difference in ergonomics. The amateur models 'got in the way' through stupid, unnecessary inconveniences. To shoot with them, you had to have the film advance level pulled partway out. If it wasn't, the camera was locked! The F3 did not have that silly 'feature' (the F4 had motorized advance); the F3 was ALWAYS ready to shoot. That tiny detail alone made an F3 worth the fact that it costs 2-3 times what the amateur models cost.

 

[tunalegs]

I figured out long ago that I cannot get along for long with any camera that has a bad viewfinder. The LTM Leicas are pretty bad in this respect. I have quite a few quirky old cameras, and can enjoy or at least look past some of their inconvenient features, but I use nothing I cannot see well with.

On that note, not necessarily a disappointment, but I think firmly in the overrated department are the Nikon F and Nikomat cameras. They're not as well finished as their fans claim them to be, the F has the shutter button in an annoying location, and overall there's not much about them I can't find in other more pleasing to use cameras. That said I could happily live with one as an only camera, but with so many other options out there, I've seen no point in doing so.

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

I figured out long ago that I cannot get along for long with any camera that has a bad viewfinder. The LTM Leicas are pretty bad in this respect. I have quite a few quirky old cameras, and can enjoy or at least look past some of their inconvenient features, but I use nothing I cannot see well with.

On that note, not necessarily a disappointment, but I think firmly in the overrated department are the Nikon F and Nikomat cameras. They're not as well finished as their fans claim them to be, the F has the shutter button in an annoying location, and overall there's not much about them I can't find in other more pleasing to use cameras. That said I could happily live with one as an only camera, but with so many other options out there, I've seen no point in doing so.

I think the F2 fixed all of the F's shortcomings. It has a better placement of the shutter release, a hinged back, and the metering finder is not so huge and top heavy.

 

[x-ray]

I purchased a new Leica M9 several years ago. In the couple of years I owned it it spent about half of the time at Leica being repaired. Sensor failure ( not corrosion ), mother board failure, RF issues and lens calibration were some of the issues.

The buffer was terribly small, it emptied slowly and the LCD screen was the worst I've ever seen. It was so unreliable that I wouldn't take it on a job. The camera was seriously over priced for the image quality it produced.

Feature wise it wasn't any more advanced than the D1 Nikon I purchased when the were introduced. The LCD was no better in the M9, the buffer size and speed were about the same as the D1. It was as though Leica bought 10 year old surplus parts from Nikon to build M9's. The difference was the D1 worked all the time.

Lens wise, the 90 apo summicron that I had to force Leica to replace and the 50 asph Summilux I first owned. The 90 never worked properly on my M9 not even after 2 trips back to Leica along with the body. I finally had to threaten a lawsuit to get it replaced.

The first 50 asph Summilux I bought wouldn't focus to infinity. I tested it on 7 bodies with the same results.

 

[jchfriis]

Olympus OM-D

I wanted a smaller backup/alternative and more modern camera than my M8 and bought an Olympus OM-D. Makes great pictures, but what a PITA to use. Coming from the simplicity of the Leica menus i't was too overwhelming for me. Pages and pages and layers upon layers. I gave up and sold it after a few months.

 

[Pherdinand]

balda super baldina (the pre-war version): looked very appealimg, with a great 50/2 lens ,coupled RF and parallax correction on the VF(!) - but then, the film transport was half broken. So i opened it up to see maybe i can fix that.
A disastrously bad design for the film transport/counting mechanism.
Also the RF is sub-par, doesn't come close to what the same aged squinty Contax or any zeiss MF folder was using.

Another thing that disappointed me was medium format C41 film. Somehow i never got nice quality results out of it beyond 4x4" printsize (slides and BW are a different story!)

 

[kiemchacsu]

Why I didn't read this thread before? It would have saved me a lot of time buying and selling stuffs. Fun thread to read.

 

[emraphoto]

Sony digital anything. I have a collection of Sony digital paperweights shaped like cameras.

 

[biomed]

Kowa Six definitely my worst experience with a camera. Ergonomics and optics (85/2.8) were good, but mechanics (at least in my two examples) were unreliable. The lens focus ring was rough, the shutter jammed quite often as did the winding knob. The first I purchased new in 1972 from Jack's Camera in Rapid City, S.D. The second was a new replacement for the faulty original. I switched to a Mamiya RB67 that was infinitely more reliable although a bit heavier.

 

[Huss]

On that note, not necessarily a disappointment, but I think firmly in the overrated department are the Nikon F and Nikomat cameras. They're not as well finished as their fans claim them to be, the F has the shutter button in an annoying location, and overall there's not much about them I can't find in other more pleasing to use cameras. That said I could happily live with one as an only camera, but with so many other options out there, I've seen no point in doing so.

I find my Nikkormat FT2s to be really well finished/engineered. They feel like rock solid pro cameras, matching up to my F2s, Fs etc. And much more solid than my FM2, FE2.

Most disappointing for me was my Canon P. Really pretty, but did not like the way it felt in the hand, and hated the VF and rangefinder patch. Weird camera that was heavy but not solid. Mine was in mint condition so it was easy to sell on after a week of ownership!

 

[Bill Clark]

Haven't had a bad camera. Just the holder of the tool needs to improve.

My photographs look pretty much the same no matter which camera I use.

I'm working to make better photographs by taking classes/attending workshops. Some offered by Leica look interesting. Maybe this old dog can learn some new tricks.

 

[Phil_F_NM]

Disappointing bodies:
Leica M9
Leica M8
Canon 10D
Fuji X100 (I've owned two but they never quite struck my fancy like I hoped they would.)

Disappointing lenses:
Leica 90mm f/4 Elmar C
35mm f/1.8 G Nikkor

Phil Forrest

 

[narsuitus]

In your photographic journey, what lens/camera/kit has disapointed you the mots, not lived up to its billing.

Miranda Sensorex 35mm SLR (broke too often)

Nikon 43-86mm Zoom f/3.5 AI (poor image quality)

Olympus micro 4/3 digital cameras (broke too often)

 

[Dave Jenkins]

C-series Hasselblads are wonderful, precise photographic instruments. I used them for more than 15 years and could never focus the suckers precisely, no matter what screens or focusing aids I used.

I love everything about rangefinder cameras, especially Leicas. I tried for literally 40 years to learn the rangefinder way of seeing and could never master it. I finally gave up sold my last M3 to Ornate Wrasse of this forum about five years ago.

Lots of people love the Nikon F2, but to me it's just a big, ugly clunker. I got totally tired of banging my fingers on the prism every time I rewound the film, sold all my Nikon stuff, and moved to the Olympus OM system, which I used very happily for many years.

 

[wakarimasen]

Might have to say this and then retreat quickly.....

Nikon D2XS, D300 and D700. I've had three attempts to get rid of the Canon stuff, and move to Nikon (for film and digital) and baulked at the decision every time. They are great with Ai/ AiS lenses, but the image quality (to me at least) has never been as good as the Canon DSLR that I owned at the time.

Other than that, I guess the Konica Auto S3 that I had didn't really float my boat.

 

[Huss]

Lots of people love the Nikon F2, but to me it's just a big, ugly clunker. I got totally tired of banging my fingers on the prism every time I rewound the film, sold all my Nikon stuff, and moved to the Olympus OM system, which I used very happily for many years.

I used to do that, until someone keyed me in on the fact that the rewind spool actually elevates much higher than most cameras (pull it beyond the first 'normal' stop) so that your fingers clear the prism when rewinding.

 

[Timmyjoe]

I have this insane romance with the Rolleiflex, yet every time I use one, it just doesn't fit my shooting style.

When the Rolleiflex didn't work out, I tried a Hasselblad 500CM, that didn't work for me either.

Had a Barnack for about three years and although I think it's one of the coolest little mechanical instruments I've ever seen, I found it too slow with the squinty rangefinder, and separate viewfinder, and wasn't a huge fan of the winding knob.

Otherwise, every camera I've used, was fine: Canon TX, Canon F-1n, Nikon N90S, Nikon FM-2N, Nikon D4s, Nikon D100, Leica M6TTL, Nikon D700, Leica M2-S, Leica M3DS, Nikon D4, Leica M3SS, Canon F-1N, Canon A-1, Nikon F3HP, Nikon F (x2).

Best,
-Tim

 

[ColSebastianMoran]

Interesting thread.

What HASN'T worked for me is bigger camera seeking higher quality. They just simply don't get carried out of the house. Should have learned the lesson, but have repeated:
- Way back then, a Hasselblad got some very good images, but didn't go out much
- Mamiya Press/Universal fabulous camera, but I don't take it anywhere
- TLRs
- More recently full-frame DSLR (Nikon D600, when they went on sale)

What HAS worked in several cycles is the next generation of camera, equal or higher quality, equally or more convenient:
- Nikon FM, FE, FE2 and N90s after the F and F2
- Yashica Electro GX after the GTN
- Fuji MX-700 and MX-4800, first dives into digital
- Lumix LX-1 and LX-5
- Sony NEX-5n, NEX-7, A6000 after DSLRs
- Nikon 300 f/4 PF after other variations of the 300 f/4

 

[Ronald M]

Dogs were C330, C220, cheap Japanese TLR from 60`s.

All Pentax after I got my first Leica. Long story.

4x5 Calumet monorails, 16 and 20 inchers.

Older large format glass