disapointment/overated kit

Regrets? I have a few...

How about every single camera I bought in "used, as-is, mint++++, parts/repair, estate sale" condition that I thought I would have or make time to test and fix.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Contax T2. Small and compact, excellent lense, but it would leak light on start-up around the lens mount. Ken Ruth couldn't figure out how to fix it, so I sold it - with the problem disclosed (too bad the RFF member who sold it to me didn't do the same!).
 
I bought 5 used R-Leicas. R3 (2x), R7 (2x) and R8. All of them were faulty, either mechanically or electronically. Three of them were sold by local dealers. Failure rate 100% - nothing more to say.
 
Really no major disappointments but I find my Zeiss Super Ikonta folder lacking in joy to use, the Xa3 to be a bit plasticky and my Intrepid 4x5 to be a bit too fiddly for my clumsy hands.
 
Wait, what?

Wait, what?

Dave Jenkins said:
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.
Click to expand...

They're "wonderful, precise photographic instruments" but you "could never focus the suckers precisely"? Seems contradictory. And despite this you used them for 15 years??

You're WAY more patient than I.
 
JOE1951 said:
Mamiya 645, and Mamiya c330, Mamiya RB67. Could never get into medium format. It just seemed a clunky compromise between my prefered 35mm Nikon/Leica and 4x5 Sinar.

Just my opinion, I know others will disagree, and more power to ya if you enjoy it. ;)
Click to expand...

Agreed Leica 35 or 4x5. The cameras you listed are for portrait work and lenses are not super sharp. The only 35 mm Japanese lenses that work fairly well are Nikon, and not the kit lenses that come with consumer cameras.

I have seen some nice monochrome from later Hasselblad and Rollie SLR , but no personnel experience.
 
Canon A-1. The Canon A-1 is very gimmicky, long on distracting flashing red lights and multiple AE modes, while short on real useability, such as not having any metered manual mode, and having a very stiff shutter release, and that horrifying Canon A-series "squeal." The plasticky feeling Canon FD lenses also were none too appealing.

Pentax MX. I really wanted to like this one, as the idea of having a small camera like my beloved OM-1 cameras, but with more advanced Gallium metering cells made the MX seem appealing. However, I found that the MX's shutter action is very unrefined compared to the OM-1, having a good deal of harsh, undampened vibration and being a good deal noisier.

On a more positive note, I just got a new to me black Nikon F2A. Always wanted to try one, but wasn't sure it would live up to the hype. The F2A I received looks almost new, is very clean and smooth, and its meter readings seem spot on. I always thought it was a very large camera and was somewhat surprised to see that it is noticeably smaller than a Nikon d750 (a modestly sized DSLR), although the F2A feels quite dense, and that the F2A has very little vibration to go along with its wonderfully crisp shutter release and shutter sound.
 
Perhaps only the dimness of my Automat focussing screen. Otherwise I love the Rollei and have film in it now. No complaint about all my Leicas and lenses, the Zeiss lenses, my Hasselblad, Pentax Spotmatic, OM2n, Coolpix 4500, Konica AF. Actually the rough focus on a sweet little Rollei 40 2.8 made me send that back.
 
The Contax T2 ! Big, heavy, expensive and the results were just ok. The Canon 40mm pancake gives me very similar results, and the small EOS film bodies have better AF and viewfinders.
I much prefer the TVS III that I've been shooting, that one actually fits in my pocket and the zoom makes it very versatile as a travelling camera.
 
Fuji DL super mini. Brought new . Wished I had got the Yashica T5 ( had a T4 but lost it). OR KNEW THE GR1 was about to be released. Lens over hyped, wife's sureshot zoom just as good or better. Time to take photo after shutter pressed toooooooo long, auto focus played up.
Vivatar 75-300MM F5.6 LENS. Nice build, great handling, poor images at all aleragutex apart from f16/22.
Nikon F2as. Finder blind lever digs into eyebrow, really anoying, so sold it. Use a F2s instead.
 
Shot film Leicas in both the M and R mounts exclusively for almost two decades, but I now feel that virtually anything Leica is overhyped, overpriced, when compared with the availability and cost of similar products from other makers.

I don't criticize anyone for shooting a M Leica -- they have a strong fraternity, excellent resale, and outstanding modern optics from the three manufacturers -- and I'm a big believer that the "best camera" is the one you want to use, no matter costs, because 10 pictures with a Leica is better then zero with something else. But for me, over time, I've come to the conclusion that Leicas are really not worth it. Still own an M3 and a couple Leicaflex SL though.

Here some others --

Nikon F & F2 with meter -- Too big and clunky. Do like the eye-level prisms.

Contarex Bullseye -- a beast when I got it, remained a beast when I used it, and a beast when I sold it. It's a camera that requires you to adjust to it.

Canon L1/Contax II (Kieve II)/Nikon S2 -- chews up eyeglasses unless precautions taken (e.g., corn plasters). Same with the later models of the Contarex.

Topcon R -- Great lenses but funky controls

Leicaflex SL2 -- Unreliable high shutter speeds. Some repair techs will tell you it is a design defect (e.g., Sherry Krauter), while others (DAG) will claim that a CLA fixes.
 
Back around the end of last century, I had made a "late in life" career change leaving engineering/program management to make my way as a newspaper/documentary shooter. At the time I was using a pair of Olympus OM-4T bodies. I felt my sports shots were lacking as the winders on the Olys only did 3 fps. So I bought a used Nikon F4S to make the jump to autofocus. The camera turned out to be a bust. I sold it for what I paid after two weeks and picked up a pair of Nikon F100 bodies with the MB-15 drives. I used those bodies for a year or so before moving into Nikon digital. The F4S was a true disappointment for me as I could do better manually focusing with my Olys.
 
littleearth said:
The Contax T2 ! Big, heavy, expensive and the results were just ok. The Canon 40mm pancake gives me very similar results, and the small EOS film bodies have better AF and viewfinders.
I much prefer the TVS III that I've been shooting, that one actually fits in my pocket and the zoom makes it very versatile as a travelling camera.
Click to expand...

Do you mean the G2? The T2 is a compact, upscale P&S. It is fairly small and light and I carried one around in a small case attached to my belt for over 20 years as my go anywhere camera. Also has an incredible Zeiss lens. Still have it. The EOS film bodies dwarf the T2 in size!
 
1.Hasselblad H system: AF is Ok, better than the contax, but I don't enjoy the whole user experience. Lenses are good but too clinical, I miss the look from Zeiss. More importantly, hasselblad also decided to put plastic gear in HC 100mm which led to an expensive service, and I think I can assume that there are plastic gear in other HC lenses. In addition, V system holds value much better than the H system.

2.Fuji xpro and x100 serious: They are not rangefinders.... and I didn't enjoy focus by wire.
 
Leica digital. When it didn't work. Ok, so the reliability of Leica was out the window with my old M8 and M9. No clue how they are now, nor do I care. My M4 survived hell with me so that's reliable enough. I'm sure most of the rest of my gear could do it as well.
Really, that's it. Hype over reliability.

Phil Forrest
 
dtcls100 said:
Do you mean the G2? The T2 is a compact, upscale P&S. It is fairly small and light and I carried one around in a small case attached to my belt for over 20 years as my go anywhere camera. Also has an incredible Zeiss lens. Still have it. The EOS film bodies dwarf the T2 in size!
Click to expand...

No, I mean the Contax T2. It's bigger than my Yashica and TVS III.
I carry P&S cameras in my pocket only and the T2 was too big. If I'm going to carry a bag or case, I'd rather shoot something else.
Also didn't like the fact that you can't choose f2.8 in Aperture priority mode. But the lens is indeed very nice.
 
ColSebastianMoran said:
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:
Click to expand...

After a recent dalliance into Hasselblad 500 land, I agree. Loved the images, just didn't take it with me because it was so cumbersome. But then I think that is really just a disappointment in myself rather than the camera. The camera was faultless, I on the other hand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom