oldoc
oldoc
Definitely the Nikon D1X. Lots of hardware for its time, lousy software and too much noise, especially in an SLR that priced at 4899. I was disappointed in the difficulty of using Mamiya 645AFD on a frequent basis due to its weight, and the weight of the associated gear.
Guess I was meant for rangefinders...
Guess I was meant for rangefinders...
mfunnell
Shaken, so blurred
I would love to disagree with you about the Ultron. I really would. I've taken a few good shots with that lens (and mine is certainly not a dog). But when push comes to shove (and even when it doesn't) if I want a 28 the M-Hexanon goes on the camera and the Ultron stays at home. Perhaps things shouldn't happen this way but they almost always do.
...Mike
Last edited:
mfunnell
Shaken, so blurred
That I can agree with. I have a nice-condition GTN which is far from a piece of junk. It is a nice camera with a number of very agreeable features and which can take a very nice photo, courtesy of its excellent lens and, dare I say it, rather wonderful metering. Nonetheless, I don't use it as much as I should. Mostly I expect because of its size (which is not small by RF standards) and its rather cod-ordinary shutter release. But these are things I could and should get used to or work around. I hearby resolve to use this rather nice camera a little more. I suspect I'll end up with photos that prove that isn't a bad idea.
...Mike
Benjamin Marks
Veteran
Mamiya 7II 80/4 lens. Would it have killed them to have the lens focus another foot closer? Jeez. Fabulous optics, but just not suited to how I want the world to look on film.
Ben Marks
Ben Marks
dazedgonebye
Veteran
Pentax 6x7.
No fault of the camera, I think. I just lusted for it for a long time then failed to bond with it.
Sounds a bit like a great many relationships I've had actually.
No fault of the camera, I think. I just lusted for it for a long time then failed to bond with it.
Sounds a bit like a great many relationships I've had actually.
jaykuhlmann
Member
CV 28mm Ultron f2.0 (it pains me to admit). My previous 28 was a Zeiss Biogon for Contax G -- much sharper lens.
R
ruben
Guest
Built in diopters are to be adjusted, via wheel at the left of pentaprism, for viewing the numbers.
On one of my OM4s the wheel is broken, so it doesn't adjust the diopters.
Another possibility may be that your sight correction goes beyond the OM4 possibilities.
Anyway ALL OM bodies enable outside diopters too.
Cheers,
Ruben
Pablito
coco frío
Couldn't agree more. I found the Konica Hexar RF to be useless, and the controls were a big part of it. And the RF that refused to stay in alignment despite repeated "factory authorized" repairs.
Also the "beloved" Hexar AF. Fabulous lens on another toy camera. Awful, inaccurate finder (even accepting the general inaccuracies of RF finders).
And the Minolta CLE, useless averaging meter, hard to use on manual, plastic battery compartment door would fall off unless held in place by tape.
These have been MY disappointments, no need to argue if you love these cameras, more power to ya'
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Absolutely! We all hear the praise, all the time, and many people are entirely happy with things that don't suit us personally. Your reply (and many others) are exactly what I was looking for: a purely personal difference from the received opinion.
To extend the idea a little, there are also products that are either quite good, or very good for the money, but are so over-praised by some people that NOTHING could live up to the hype that they propagate. The Jupiter 85/2 springs to mind.
Cheers,
R.
ferider
Veteran
Agree with that one.
Thinking about disappointment in terms of "I will not try/use one of those again", the other things that come to mind are:
- Canon 50/1.2 LTM (under the bottom line there are many, slower 50s that are easier to handle and generate nicer pictures)
- Bessas. I have tried Bessa T, R, R2 and R3a, and was never able to get a truly sharp picture out of them. Sharp in terms of using a great lens on them and being impressed by the resolution when enlarging to more than 8x10.
Just my very personal and emotional opinion
The disappointment is larger, the more praised I see those things, because then I blame myself for not making them work.Roland.
gavinlg
Veteran
I really disliked my ultron 28mm 1.9 as well - really overrated optic.
tbarker13
shooter of stuff
I guess I'd have to put the M8 on this list. I won't say I haven't enjoyed shooting either of mine. But the glitches and quirks (not to mention months of shooting time lost to repairs in Solms) just didn't live up to my expectations based on my experiences with Leica's film bodies.
R
ruben
Guest
Hellow Nick Earth Calling....
You forgot about that outstanding silent shutter. Both relatively to any RF, and more outstandingly relative to a 45mm length RF
Next time you will pay fine
However. this camera has an unfortunate clunky look due to the undue cheap covering, and the even worse cheapy case (puach !)
PS
And that shutter button locker is missed in many of my other cameras (ATTENTION ANTI-SOFTIE SCAMMERS !)
Last edited by a moderator:
gavinlg
Veteran
As I said, great lens from what I've seen done with it, but seriously... I went through 4-5 of them 2 years ago. Each one I bought was meant to be working, and was in near mint condition. On each one of them, the RF patch was faded beyond use and not one of them gave me a consistent roll of film. The one that did give me a consistent roll was soft at anything below f4ish, and it wasn't focussing errors either. Even after I replaced the POD in 2 of them, both didn't work properly afterwards, or did for a few frames then died.
The shutter priority is just wack - couldn't get used to the way it works with the under and over lights etc.
Maybe I should rephrase that to " To me, the yashica was a piece of junk. I realised after I went through 4-5 60-100$ cameras that i could have just bought a bessa r2a for the same price - much better camera.
Mark Wood
Well-known
A Lomo LC-A in the mid-1980s when they were badged as "Zenit" and, although it's hard to believe now, sold in the UK as "serious" compact cameras by TOE. This was well before all of the "Emperor's new clothes" Lomography hype of course and when they were still regarded as copies of the (quite respectable) Cosina CX-2. I had three, all from a proper camera shop, before I got one that actually worked - for one and a half films... Sadly, it was a pile of junk with a lens incapable of giving a sharp picture. I always wonder if its shutter packed in (as it had in the previous two) as it was embarrassed by what would result on film if it opened...!
chris00nj
Young Luddite
Screwmount Leica lenses. I hate to admit it, but the image quality isn't as good as the Nikon and Canon counterparts and they cost more.
Mark Wood
Well-known
Just to avoid a war of words, I ought to add that I thought long and hard before calling this camera a pile of junk. Well, not that long actually, it really was...!!
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
1. I'm just glad that I'm not the only one who are puzzled over the quality of the famous Canonet QL17 GIII. I had one, CLA'd, tried it, and went... huh? low-contrast, so-so sharpness, and ended up selling it for more than the price I paid for the camera + CLA. Puzzling? indeed.
2. Rollei 35 S. I was prepared to be blown away by the rendering from the legendary Sonnar lens. But... meh. Again, from a serviced sample (and coverted to use modern battery). Now, to show that I'm not utterly clueless, I have a Sonnar 50/1.5 for Contax and a Jupiter-8. The pictures from these are vastly better to the Rollei. Maybe I got a CLA'd lemon, who knows.
3. Yashica Mat 124. Just can't get a wow picture out of this one. Once again, either I got a CLA'd lemon (again), or the lens isn't what it's cracked up to be. For comparison, I'm super happy with the results I got from a Mamiya C330.
2. Rollei 35 S. I was prepared to be blown away by the rendering from the legendary Sonnar lens. But... meh. Again, from a serviced sample (and coverted to use modern battery). Now, to show that I'm not utterly clueless, I have a Sonnar 50/1.5 for Contax and a Jupiter-8. The pictures from these are vastly better to the Rollei. Maybe I got a CLA'd lemon, who knows.
3. Yashica Mat 124. Just can't get a wow picture out of this one. Once again, either I got a CLA'd lemon (again), or the lens isn't what it's cracked up to be. For comparison, I'm super happy with the results I got from a Mamiya C330.
Dave Wilkinson
Veteran
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Roland,
Yes, that's an important part of the thread, now you mention it. We think, 'Hey, why can't I make it work?'
I'm coming to the conclusion it doesn't matter, as long as there are things that work for us.
But it is irritating when people look at you pityingly and imply that it's your fault you're unimpressed by something.
Tashi delek,
Roger