Disappointments

For me, there have really only been two cameras like this: the Canon P and the Olympus XA. Not sure "disappointed" would be my word choice, but neither worked well for me. The P was/is a good camera but with my particular eyesight and glasses, I found the 35mm frame lines effectively un-usable. No fault of the camera. Passed that one along fairly quickly.
With the XA, even though I am not a large person, the camera was too small for me to use well. Absolutely as it was designed and I did work with it for a while in hopes of getting used to it.
I will not "second guess" anyone elses' choices but I will note that, thankfully, some of the gear I like is NOT universally appreciated!
Rob
 
Biggest disappointments:
Canon 50mm 1.2L - three samples. Only one focused properly, and it still wasn't as sharp as my old EF50/1.4.
Hasselblad 110/2 FE - everyone loves the bokeh. Except me.
Leica 50mm DR Summicron - probably didn't use it enough, but my initial results were not good.
Leica M7 / .85, but only because i should have stayed with a .72 finder.
Olympus XA - my sample was just soft, and i also didn't love the teensy focus arm.

Best surprises:
Nikon 50mm 1.8 Series E - my new favorite lens. At f2.8, it's perfect.
Nikon FE2.
 
Any Soviet camera or lens ...

After all, how bad could they be? And people wax lyrical about certain classics. So, I bought a Jupiter 8 and Iskra...

Junk! Imagine a camera designed and built by a blacksmith who'd rather be doing something else! Crude, uncomfortable, carelessly built and fly-blown with faults...! 😱
 
mfunnell said:
Dave Wilkinson said:
Funny! I have a Mamiya 645 and it never occurred to me to use it in any way except on a tripod. Something I knew before I bought it. I don't know what that proves (and suspect it proves nothing whatsoever) but found the comment vaguely amusing nonetheless.

...Mike
Click to expand...


I also have the Mamiya 645 and rarely use it on a tripod...my beef with it is the second shutter release on top...I have hit it too many times...I lock the shutter when I'm done shooting or else I might lose another frame...

I also own the Nikon 85mm 1.4 AF lens...I'm not really complaining about it...it is a sharp lens and a nice hunk of glass...I just don't use it as much as I thought I would...
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
"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."

Very very valid point! Interestingly I see that only with those in LTM. After reading eulogies how well it worked with the Bessas stopped down and/or the backfocussing compensated I tried it and found it to produce average results and that it was prone to flare so that it was not a user lens for me. Whereas the chrome version of my Kiev/Contax mount J 9 is very good.
But when it comes to praising I saw an analogous phenomenon in Bulgaria:
If a company starts selling a brand of grape brandy that turns out to gain a big market share because of its good quality, the following year the quality drops as then the company thinks that the brand alone is enough to keep sales high.....well it is'nt so one of Bulgarias favourite pastimes is finding the best brand of grape brandy for the year....
Maybe many years ago J 9's in ltm were of decent quality but the hype pressed so many worn out or badly built J9's back into service that it simply had to happen...especially given the fact that the number of screwmount cameras wasmuch higher that cameras with the Kiev/Contax mount (definitely leaving Nikon out of the picture.)
 
fdigital said:
To me...
Click to expand...
Eh - if I had your bad luck on these things, I might agree but you can't rate a 30+ year old camera as a "piece of junk" based on the condition of your sample(s). I've only owned two Electros, a "CC" and a GSN. Both in great condition in all aspects and both were very inexpensive (got lucky with the "CC)... so, YMMV as the expression goes. The thread does say "dissappointments", and I'm sure you were, but the camera itself - for the price, is far from "a piece of junk" in light of its features/capabilities... The ones you bought were pieces of junk, the camera itself - however, isn't junk at all. I've had 3 Fujica Compact Deluxes - first two died, 3 was the charm (donated by a very generous RF member to whom I am grateful...) but I don't consider this camera "junk" based on my experience of the first two samples... which had all kinds of problems, desilvering, dodgey meter, messed up film counter. To the contrary... They whet my appetite to get one that works.

Incidently, I gave my GSN away to a budding young photographer and never replaced it (have others - too many) but I still think it's a great camera.
|

Here's my disappointment: M42 Zeiss Jena f1.8/50mm Pancolar. Sought-after lens, had to have it... got it and - "eh" run of the mill "great" 50mm imo - VG but nothing distinguishing it over the other 50s - all of which perfrom well. Like my 1.4 radioactive Tak better in 50mm M42, actually...
 
Nikon D200...sold it after 3 months. I'm sure it was just me but I did not enjoy using it at all.

BOB
 
Nikon D1. Extremely heavy. Batteries were always dead when I picked it up. I found that I had to charge the batteries the night before if I intended to use the camera. I am not sure if I had a bad battery but I had two batteries and it was the same with both. Often when I needed the camera the batteries did not have a full charge. Carrying a spare batteries was unnecessary weight.

Now to go back why, Keith did you not like the M7? And, why is the MP on this list. Please elucidate as I would think (though I never used either) these two would be good cameras.
 
Every time I think the gear is disappointing I realize it's just me. I can take a lousy picture with anything (or a good one).
 
Last edited:
Epson 3200 scanner. Bought to scan the negatives from my Exakta 66 with Schneider Xenotar 80mm f2.8.

The scanner software insisted on cropping the shots from the film holder itself. I shot low light and the software never got it right. Vuescan just gave the whole scanner image including the film holder, so I had to crop the shot out by hand myself.

Sold the scanner, and eventually the Exakta with lens as well. Which was a stupid move, it was the first edition Xenotar, that lens was unbelievable.
 
18-200 VR Nikkor was and remains a disappointment. Both of my old, now sold, 24mm f/2.0 and 35mm f/2.0 Nikkors were both soft with low contrast.
 
Leica Summilux 35f1.4 Asph, The first one flared so badly that it would "opaque" out the image. Sent it to Solms, they replaced some stuff - it still flared wildly, they exchanged it for another one. Less flare, but somehow I never trusted it after that and got rid of it.
The M7, nice enough camera (loved the 32 sec. slow count down) but the exposure compensation was way too fiddly. It also had a tendency to produce black frames when i shot fast!
The 90 mm Summicron F2 Apo-Asph. I expected much more from it. Kind of lack lustre performance at f2.0 and really did not come into its own until 5.6.
First version of the Zeiss 40mm for the Hasselblad. Second version was good, 1 st version was a textbook of optical failures.
 
I don't want anyone to assume that I'm suggesting that because I disliked these cameras that I believe that they are categorically, junk. They are in all likelihood great cameras to others but not to me.......at least at the time.

-Yashica 124G, sounded like a coffee grinder, did not like the finder or the switching hands. The guy who bought it, loves the thing has and done some really nice work with it. (OK, yep, it is an operator issue, after all.)

-Rollei 35SE. No room in my heart for such a camera, far prefer my Olympus XA.

-Rolleiflex Automat. Not wild about switching hands and not being able to switch lenses. But what a beautiful instrument and so quiet.

-Canonet QL19. The big one and the small one. The Wife's father had the big one and I bought the small one at a junk store. Both work well. What in heaven's name is the big deal with these things?

-Olympus OM-1. Too small for me but really nicely made. Took a while before I got rid of it. New owner has OM2 as well. Thinks I'm nuts.
 
The latest version of the 50mm Summicron is one for me. After reading so many great things about it, including Erwin Puts' declaration that it "is a better lens than most people are photographers." I thought it would be f2.0's great gift to photographers everywhere. Now, Mr. Puts may well be correct, but I found the results with it uninspiring. While its optical performance cannot be faulted, it's probably just a little too well corrected for my taste.

You know, come to think of it - the latest 50mm Summicron is a kit lens!

Oh and while we're at it, Echo and the Bunnymen's Porcupine was a huge dissapointment!
 
Last edited:
Livesteamer said:
Nikkor 28mm f2.0 in original Nikon F mount. I just never liked the images I got from it. The Nikkor 24mm f2.8 is an all time favorite. Joe
Click to expand...

Ditto - for both lenses.

After having read all the praise on the net about the Nikkor Ai-S 28mm f2, I was very disappointed in the results.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom