Ever been superficial with your camera purchases?

[Huss]

I just picked up a beautiful P, just because it was so pretty. I rationalized it by the fact that I already had LTM lenses that I could use on it. My new J8 seems to focus perfectly on it judging by its infinity focus, while on my Leicas with LTM-M adaptor it will not reach infinity in the VF, but does in actual use.
But.. it just doesn't do it for me. The VF and especially RF patch is not remotely as good as a Leica M, or Minolta CLE. And the body feels hard and angular to me. Weird because my M5 and CLE are also angular but for some reason much more comfortable to hold.
To be fair, you can get two or three Ps for one Leica M but I guess there is a very good reason for that.

My P. What a looker. That'll teach me for being so shallow!:

As for the J8 - what a lens! I picked up a NOS one from a Russian seller which had perfect clean/haze free glass. Apart from the clickless aperture ring being easy to change your settings, it just flat out rocks.

Taken with an M4-2 on BW400CN (not the P, still going through that first film) and the J8:

So, buying the P just because it was so pretty has not yet worked out for me.
The J8, on the other hand, has been the opposite reaction.

 

[Robert Lai]

It takes time to familiarize yourself with anything.
When I first got my Nikon F2 (with DP-11 head), my impression was that "This thing is so D*MN huge I'm not going to carry it anywhere". After a while, and with some nice pictures out of it, you learn to love it.

Plus, if you really don't like the P, a lot of us here will gladly buy it off you.

 

[Huss]

It takes time to familiarize yourself with anything.
When I first got my Nikon F2 (with DP-11 head), my impression was that "This thing is so D*MN huge I'm not going to carry it anywhere". After a while, and with some nice pictures out of it, you learn to love it.

Plus, if you really don't like the P, a lot of us here will gladly buy it off you.

I get that, and I have many cameras but this is the first one in a long time that has done this. Even my newly acquired Zenit felt great to me straight off!

I guess it just shows how things are different for different peeps. The first time I handled my F2 (with the similar DP-12 head) it felt awesome, and that impression has not changed with use.

 

[aizan]

always! it's chrome leicas or bust for me since brass doesn't match my wardrobe. and i'll never get a digital leica until they get rid of the brightness sensor. i chose the pentax sl over the spotmatic because it has a cleaner look to it, but no meter. i like the rolleiflex mx-evs better than the 3.5f and such because the focusing knob is "one piece" and has a more solid feel with no play. i write off micro 4/3 because of the heterogenous styles of their lenses (though the new panasonic 2.8 zooms have me reconsidering now that they're black instead of purple-ish). i don't like the chrome hasselblad lenses because it's just too much chrome. i will never get a wooden canham because the tone of the wood stain is too cool, and i'll never get a chamonix or a wilderness because i don't like the typefaces of the engravings.

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

I'm too poor to be superficial in camera buying.

 

[farlymac]

I like Exacta cameras because they are the opposite of beautiful. Cool, yes, but a thing of beauty? Naw.

I look at a camera and wonder how will it feel in my hands, does it have the features I want, and will it work good. If it fulfills those three criteria, then I can think about its looks, although looks will get me to check it out in the first place.

But I don't pull the buy trigger on looks alone. I've gotten way too old for that. I bought my Canon P because it was offered to me at an attractive price.

PF

 

[zuiko85]

I didn't do due diligence buying a M4-2 and paid $250 extra in repairs for my lapse of caution. Camera was pretty but slow speed escapement went south within a month. Youxin said looked like something thought it needed tractor grease for lube. Private sale at a photo show so no recourse, never saw the guy again.

 

[zuiko85]

I'm too poor to be superficial in camera buying.

Makes sense. Kind of like saying 'I'm to poor to buy cheap stuff'

 

[Keith]

Definitely yes. I was totally captivated by the appearance of the Panon Widelux and now have two of them, a seven and an eight. They also take very good photos but are prone to banding and can take some mastering over all before you get your head around the swing lens concept and how to make it work for you. I don't shoot film any longer but would never part with those cameras purely based on how much I like the way they look.

 

[defconfunk]

Maybe not the original purchase, but I'm definitely being shallow about keeping a piece of kit: My Canon FL 85mm f1.8

I use this lens both on FD bodies and on a metabones speedbooster. The logical part of me says I should upgrade to a FD SSC or FDn when one shows up cheap. But I never do. While the FL requires stop down metering on my film bodies and is very soft at f1.8 (I believe it was advertised as soft-focus at f1.8, talk about marketing to your disadvantage), I just love how the thing looks and feels.

Besides, when I want the highest quality possible, I'll be shooting native glass on digital or medium format film. If I'm shooting 35mm or adapted lenses I'm going for a certain look and feel, not pixel peeping perfection. Or so I keep telling myself.

 

[ChrisPlatt]

Some photographers pay more for black finish because it shows more wear over time.
Some photographers will opt for chrome finish because it shows less wear over time.
So either choice is somewhat superficial, no? I guess we are all guilty... 😛

Chris

 

[jarski]

My new J8 seems to focus perfectly on it judging by its infinity focus, while on my Leicas with LTM-M adaptor it will not reach infinity in the VF, but does in actual use.

is this a common with Canon rangefinders, or just in this case? I thought Canon followed the Leica standard and didnt part from it like Soviets.

 

[jsrockit]

Sure, aesthetics come into play for me... but only after other concerns.

 

[Jockos]

Does it count when you tear off an ugly, but light tight, black bellows to replace it with a red one? Or when you replace the carry strap with a custom made alligator leather one?

:angel:

 

[bsdunek]

Does a mustard colored Holga count?

 

[emraphoto]

Definitely used to. These days though I am absolutely content with a Nikon F and F2. I seem to have long ago left the age of buying and selling for aesthetics. Unless one of the two breaks, I see no need for new cameras.

 

[charjohncarter]

In 1964 I bought a IIIf not only thinking I would look cool with it, but also I would be a great photographer. Nobody in Oregon knew what a Leica was or thought I was a great photographer.

 

[BLKRCAT]

Pretty much my M4 purchase.

Did I need another M, not really. Did I think an M4 would be sexy to have? Hell yeah.

Other than t he M4 my cameras aren't good lookers. The M5 is supposedly the ugly duckling, the P67 with the P67ii WLF looks like some sort of SLR abomination, the G690 is just too big, the F100 Ive been playing with looks so vanilla, and the fuji XT1 I have just to mess around with is maybe better than the F100 in terms of looks but I have a hard time thinking anything with a "pentaprism" hump looks good.

It's just Leica snobbery. All cameras still perform great and I cant complain about any of them. Apart from the M4 looks aren't important to me anyways.

 

[mich rassena]

I make no excuses for being a superficial camera buyer. While the Internet consensus is that collecting cameras for your shelf is a bad thing, I don't care. I have my eye on a Bilora Bella, Pentacon Penti, and a Werra...not to mention many others, for entirely superficial reasons.

 

[Scapevision]

Not prone to "looks" so no leicas in my possession. Oh wait, I do have a non working R3 MOT, but it's not a real leica. Closest I got to superficiality was a Hasslebald 500c/m which turned out to live up to its name in terms of hassle. Sold eventually.