f16sunshine
Moderator
Agreed
They are great machines I just don't care for how they feel in my hands. Same with the lenses.
I prefer the aperture ring on the front like a rf or OM.
Zeiss/Contax SLR being the acceptation. .
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
D700 ... just can't like it. But I have no intention of selling it and the shutter count is rising!
Irony!
Irony!
cosmonaut
Well-known
I have a D800 and although I love the output it's not my favorite camera to use. If I could just put that amazing sensor in my a99 I would never want for another camera.
cosmonaut
Well-known
D700 ... just can't like it. But I have no intention of selling it and the shutter count is rising!
Irony!
As mentioned before about my D800 I truly understand where you are coming from.
rolfe
Well-known
Bronica RF645.
Thought I would love it, but hardly use it. When I would pick it up I pick up a Leica instead. Nevertheless, I can't bring myself to sell it...
Thought I would love it, but hardly use it. When I would pick it up I pick up a Leica instead. Nevertheless, I can't bring myself to sell it...
tunalegs
Pretended Artist
I don't think I've ever got along with any of the Pentax cameras I've tried. Even the early ones, I appreciate the quality, but they just don't feel right in the hand or to my eyes.
gustavoAvila
Established
The Nikon F3.
Back in 1980, I traded an Olympus system (plus a Nikon SP) for a Nikon F3 and a brace of lenses. Biggest photography equipment mistake I ever made! Not only was the body less ergonomic than the Olympus OM's, the lenses were no better! A couple of years later I sold the F3 and have never regretted it.
Back in 1980, I traded an Olympus system (plus a Nikon SP) for a Nikon F3 and a brace of lenses. Biggest photography equipment mistake I ever made! Not only was the body less ergonomic than the Olympus OM's, the lenses were no better! A couple of years later I sold the F3 and have never regretted it.
hepcat
Former PH, USN
From the old days, I agree with those who just never got on with the Nikon Ftn and subsequent models. I didn't either. I used 'em but I could never bring myself to buy one.
More recently, the Fuji X-Pro1. I bought one and hard as I tried for six months and several thousand exposures, I just couldn't make it fit my working style. The X-Pro1 was the camera that drove me back to Leica.
More recently, the Fuji X-Pro1. I bought one and hard as I tried for six months and several thousand exposures, I just couldn't make it fit my working style. The X-Pro1 was the camera that drove me back to Leica.
DougFord
on the good foot
Loved my m6 classic. Bought a used ttl, never even used it. Resold. (lol)
peterm1
Veteran
The Voigtlander Prominent rangefinder camera from the 1950s. To be honest there were things I loved about it - built like a tank, it had a type of satin chrome that you could hit with an abrasive wire wheel and I am sure it would not scratch - unlike Leica cameras that seemed to scratch if you looked at them.
It was solid and beautifully, if idiosyncratically designed, engineered and built.
It had a leaf shutter that was an order of magnitude more quiet than a Leica M shutter but like older Leica LTM cameras you had to cock the shutter before you changed shutter speeds (I think my memory is correct, here). Because it was a leaf shutter, photo reporters of the era were said to love it - you could use a flash and it would sync at all speeds up to the camera's maximum speed, which was 1/500th of a second (not all that fast).
It also had a fairly pokey viewfinder by comparison with M cameras (at least the model I had did - a later version had a larger finder). That tended to mean you had to use an accessory finder for all lenses - which meant that the accessory shoe was always in use.
There was also a very limited range of lenses for this camera and that made it a bit restricted. But I have to say those lenses were quite nice to use, if rather low in contrast.
It was an odd mixture of old, new and, well, just different!
But in the end its idiosyncracities were just too much - like having to turn a knob on the left top side of the camera to focus the lens. It just became too hard so I sold it as it was not getting enough use.
I loved the idea of it though and still like to look at pictures of them.
It was solid and beautifully, if idiosyncratically designed, engineered and built.
It had a leaf shutter that was an order of magnitude more quiet than a Leica M shutter but like older Leica LTM cameras you had to cock the shutter before you changed shutter speeds (I think my memory is correct, here). Because it was a leaf shutter, photo reporters of the era were said to love it - you could use a flash and it would sync at all speeds up to the camera's maximum speed, which was 1/500th of a second (not all that fast).
It also had a fairly pokey viewfinder by comparison with M cameras (at least the model I had did - a later version had a larger finder). That tended to mean you had to use an accessory finder for all lenses - which meant that the accessory shoe was always in use.
There was also a very limited range of lenses for this camera and that made it a bit restricted. But I have to say those lenses were quite nice to use, if rather low in contrast.
It was an odd mixture of old, new and, well, just different!
But in the end its idiosyncracities were just too much - like having to turn a knob on the left top side of the camera to focus the lens. It just became too hard so I sold it as it was not getting enough use.
I loved the idea of it though and still like to look at pictures of them.
Murchu
Well-known
Any medium format camera with a waist level viewfinder. Beautiful machines, and I love the 6x6 format, but could never get used to using any of them handheld.
I will also add any digital compact camera I've used to this list also. I wrestled with all of them whenever I wanted to take an image and hated using them. Ricoh has been my saviour in this regard thankfully.
I will also add any digital compact camera I've used to this list also. I wrestled with all of them whenever I wanted to take an image and hated using them. Ricoh has been my saviour in this regard thankfully.
peterm1
Veteran
Actually reading these posts about Nikons brings to mind that I have an issue with their 24-70mm f2.8 pro zoom. This is a superb lens and I saved forever to buy the damn thing. Sharp as a tack at most settings, well engineered, very few vices and all that.
But for some reason I just do not warm to it all that much. Perhaps it is its form factor - its very long and skinny and I find that when I carry it, I tend to bump into things. This puts me on edge. Every time I walk thru a door, every time I am in crowds, bang the front of the lens hits something or someone.
It is also something to do with the fact that I prefer lenses with more interesting character - this one is so "clinical".
I have an older 35-70mm f2.8 from the 1990s and sometimes use this in preference just because its smaller and a little lighter.
But for some reason I just do not warm to it all that much. Perhaps it is its form factor - its very long and skinny and I find that when I carry it, I tend to bump into things. This puts me on edge. Every time I walk thru a door, every time I am in crowds, bang the front of the lens hits something or someone.
It is also something to do with the fact that I prefer lenses with more interesting character - this one is so "clinical".
I have an older 35-70mm f2.8 from the 1990s and sometimes use this in preference just because its smaller and a little lighter.
mugent
Well-known
Film: Nikon FM3a, feels cheap and tinny in the hand, VF meter is hard to read in certain lighting conditions. It's a nice camera to look at, but that's all it is. (prepares for lynching)...
Digital : Sony NEX 7, focus peaking is only OK, results are surprisingly noisy even at base ISO, it's a good camera, but there are many better ones for the money.
On the flipside, Sigma SLRs get a lot of stick, but I think they are lovely, so maybe it's me...
Digital : Sony NEX 7, focus peaking is only OK, results are surprisingly noisy even at base ISO, it's a good camera, but there are many better ones for the money.
On the flipside, Sigma SLRs get a lot of stick, but I think they are lovely, so maybe it's me...
Takkun
Ian M.
A couple, made possible from a stint dealing used cameras:
Most screw mount pentaxes, they just seemed a bit rough compared to some of their contemporaries.
Most of the Maxxum bodies, save for the superb 7 and 9. I really wanted a 9 and regret turning down the offer.
Two cameras I've personally owned: the Canon Digital Rebel from when I switched from Nikon film to digital. It just felt so clunky compared to my N90 at the time, or even the EOS 7 film camera. Much more solid than its film counterpart.
The other is the Contax RTS I. Loved the aesthetics, didnt like the control layout. I also just didnt want to buy into another SLR system.
Most screw mount pentaxes, they just seemed a bit rough compared to some of their contemporaries.
Most of the Maxxum bodies, save for the superb 7 and 9. I really wanted a 9 and regret turning down the offer.
Two cameras I've personally owned: the Canon Digital Rebel from when I switched from Nikon film to digital. It just felt so clunky compared to my N90 at the time, or even the EOS 7 film camera. Much more solid than its film counterpart.
The other is the Contax RTS I. Loved the aesthetics, didnt like the control layout. I also just didnt want to buy into another SLR system.
mugent
Well-known
Oh, never owned it, but used it, the Leica R8, maybe my hands are too small, but the handling is atrocious, and poorly thought out. It's enormous for no good reason, and weighs a ton. It's looks pretty, but I think that's the only good thing about that camera.
Last edited:
DNG
Film Friendly
Minolta 7000
Didn't like it after a few months, it just felt cheap, although, it had a great meter, and lenses though.
I went to a Canon EOS 630 after that... Much Better!!
Didn't like it after a few months, it just felt cheap, although, it had a great meter, and lenses though.
I went to a Canon EOS 630 after that... Much Better!!
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
leicapixie
Well-known
Bronica-c. so bad, nothing comes close!
the camera was a demon.
Shredded film like a CIA operative about to be busted.
It could eject the film, better than a Starfighter*, the pilot.
* Starfighter nick named the "widow maker".
The Leica M6 may not be as quality "feel" as older Leica
but compared to all the plastic stuff now available,
from a sell out, toys-r-us" it's way ahead.
the camera was a demon.
Shredded film like a CIA operative about to be busted.
It could eject the film, better than a Starfighter*, the pilot.
* Starfighter nick named the "widow maker".
The Leica M6 may not be as quality "feel" as older Leica
but compared to all the plastic stuff now available,
from a sell out, toys-r-us" it's way ahead.
CK Dexter Haven
Well-known
Leica M7. Beautifully made, but frustrating to use. Always felt silly to have to adapt to it, while i was still using other cameras that worked the way i wanted/was used to. I later got a Zeiss Ikon, which was fundamentally the same, but a bit better in every way except heft.
Pentax 67. Loved it except for the mirror slap which killed sharpness in too many pictures. Always used it handheld, for either fashion or travel portraiture. Great camera, under the right circumstances, but you need to be able to control those circumstances or deal with some unfortunate limitations.
Leica CM. Great lens. Horrendous viewfinder. A travesty. A CRIME.
Pentax 67. Loved it except for the mirror slap which killed sharpness in too many pictures. Always used it handheld, for either fashion or travel portraiture. Great camera, under the right circumstances, but you need to be able to control those circumstances or deal with some unfortunate limitations.
Leica CM. Great lens. Horrendous viewfinder. A travesty. A CRIME.
CK Dexter Haven
Well-known
How about another thread: Camera You Liked the Most, but Still Didn't Keep ? Or some such.....