Photography Gear that never caused you GAS

[rick oleson]

When did you finish it?

I've STILL got a roll of (I think) 24-shot Kodak Colorplus which I had in my Petri Half/Compact/Junior (it's labelled "Compact", but I add its alternative names so people know which one which particular one I mean, after all they did a number of cameras most people describe as "Compacts") that I finished in July 2025. I'm not sure about the end of the film as I was merrily clicking away at what looked to me as a count of 50 or so, but then I later noticed the counter was still at 50 about ten shots later, lol.

I shot it at the end of October 2024; haven't developed it because I was hoping to figure out a way to save the plastic 126 cartridge rather than just breaking it open to get the film out. And haven't done that yet.

 

[seany65]

Yeah, that was one of two silly design faults of the cartridges, the other apparently being that the film was held only on the take up spool and not the um, feeder spool so there was more film play in that side.

 

[rick oleson]

Yeah, that was one of two silly design faults of the cartridges, the other apparently being that the film was held only on the take up spool and not the um, feeder spool so there was more film play in that side.

I don’t think Eastman had intended them for the level of hardware that camera makers came up with for the 126 format. They were looking for captive proprietary film sales to replace 127 in the high volume snapshot market, and the world (including Nagel) took them too seriously.

 

[Rob-F]

Also, Hasselblads. Great lenses, awful to use.

Yeah, I do have a love/hate relationship with them. Hard to focus with wide angle lenses even with enhanced screens. I mostly scale focus. Damn dark slide. Light leaks. I'm not a square format guy (I use the A16 back mostly). I did my best MF work with a Pentax 67. But the Hassie SWC, that's another story.

 

[pgh]

Any lens wider than 35mm or longer than 90mm (or equivalent in medium format).
Any lens notably larger than the camera body.
Any novelty lens like a 1.2 or macro or whatever.
Any mirrorless camera (I own an SL2 but that was out of necessity, not any real desire).

Any digital Hasselblads (had to own a 907 and a x2d for years to get cured of this, I tried so hard to love them, but I am well and fully cured of it now). Well shoot - it did cause me want, so I can’t say never with those. However, that is well and fully gone now.

I think I could go on - most gear is not so interesting to me. I’d rather the buy up time to make work or rolls of film.

Unfortunately I very much like rangefinders of the M and Mamiya sorts so that’s still left plenty of room to spend on…more than is good for me.

 

[Alpsman]

The following things leave me completely cold:
cameras which needs a battery to work
digital cameras
zoom lenses
plastic cameras
autofocus and all the fancy stuff what can be built into a lens

What triggers me are
fully metal cameras & lenses
fully mechanical cameras and lenses
prime lenses

 

[David Murphy]

Anything requiring a battery to use, except perhaps a cine camera like an Arriflex.

 

[Shadams]

Zoom lenses? 🤔

I get it, but zooms nowadays.... ridiculous technology. But the secret for me is not to use the zoom for framing (unless you really have to) but rather to use it to compress or decompress the subject-field-ground relationship. When I want to push the background away, I'll climb fences to get close and go wide. When I want to flatten - often with head shots or landscapes - I'll back up and go long. But this is from a guy who shot fashion with 1000+mm lenses. Walkie-talkie for the assistant with the reflector.

 

[d_c]

I just can't be bothered with zoom lenses, big long telephotos, and camera rucksacks. There's plenty of other stuff that I've wondered about maybe once or twice until I come back to my senses, but never any of these things.

 

[Malcolm M]

Automation. A camera should do what it's told on the only controls that matter (focus, shutter speed, aperture). No camera needs a 678 page manual which is entirely useless because you don't know the word to look for in the index to get it back into line.

 

[rfaspen]

Absolutely no interest in any moving picture gear -- e.g., super 8, 16mm. Yet people are constantly giving me their old movie cameras. I got a box out in the garage that gets heavier and heavier.
* Exception to my complete disinterest in movie kit would be older lenses for the "35mm" format. There are quite a few very interesting old 35mm cine lenses that will cover still format FF 35mm of my cameras. Never came across any of those that fall within my budgetary constraints though...

 

[Shadams]

I just can't be bothered with zoom lenses, big long telephotos, and camera rucksacks. There's plenty of other stuff that I've wondered about maybe once or twice until I come back to my senses, but never any of these things.

Ironically, the high-quality (but relatively slow) zoom on a digital body was the liberation point for me. One lens, 24-240mm, not much bigger than an 90 2.0, on a full-frame body and a spare battery in my pocket. That config did away with camera bags, roll-aboards, backpacks and the like. Nothing but me and one camera/lens. No lens changes. No multiple bodies. Just picture making.

But for me, like rfaspen, motion picture gear just leaves me... uninterested.

 

[ChrisPlatt]

Any camera with electronic push buttons and most cameras with LCD displays (with the exception of my Nikon F4)....

Chris