Beemermark
Veteran
Sort of hard for me to see why the Argus C3 was in the worse camera category. Decent lens, relatively cheap, bought by 10's of thousands family photographers (and the USN), took great pictures and after 70 years still going strong. Sure it wasn't the prettiest camera and maybe no famous photographer used one. But it did exactly what it was designed to do and did it well. Same can be said for the vast majority of Kodak camera. Not the same as buying a $5K Leica M9 that was doomed to fail.
Let's see, Leica supposedly the best, and certainly most expensive cameras out there:
Leica CL, very high meter failure rate. Not after decades but usually in warranty and then again out of warranty.
Leica R4. 1st thousand or so had a 100% failure rate. Leica wouldn't repair them (couldn't) and no one else could either.
Leica M4-2, I know you love then but it took a few internal design changes to get the failure rate below 30%
Leica M9, 100% failure rate due to a defective sensor design.
Having difficulty trying to understand why people think cheap cameras that the masses could afford and worked well are failures, but Leica that probably created more high dollar failures than anybody is great. I've always wondered how Leica survived.
Let's see, Leica supposedly the best, and certainly most expensive cameras out there:
Leica CL, very high meter failure rate. Not after decades but usually in warranty and then again out of warranty.
Leica R4. 1st thousand or so had a 100% failure rate. Leica wouldn't repair them (couldn't) and no one else could either.
Leica M4-2, I know you love then but it took a few internal design changes to get the failure rate below 30%
Leica M9, 100% failure rate due to a defective sensor design.
Having difficulty trying to understand why people think cheap cameras that the masses could afford and worked well are failures, but Leica that probably created more high dollar failures than anybody is great. I've always wondered how Leica survived.