The WORST Cameras of all time..

Don’t know about worst but, I’d like to see ugliest list. My vote would be for the Contarex Bullseye.
Can’t argue about the Fotron though, both ugly and ill conceived. Argus bricks? Ah I don’t know, they are ugly but have a solid place in the history of hobby photography.
Also believe one would have to make a distinction between hobby photographers and folks that rely on their cameras to make a living. For the professional the worst camera just may have a poor service or maintenance record.
 
My first 35mm SLR, a brand new Miranda Sensorex, was my worst camera for all time.

Back in the 1960s, Consumer Reports magazine declared that Miranda Sensorex was the “best buy for the money.” Their declaration had a great influence on my decision to select the Sensorex as my first SLR. However, my Sensorex broke three times within the first two years of its three-year warranty. The third time it broke was when I was hundreds of feet in the air covering the maiden voyage of a new aircraft that the local university had just acquired. Thank goodness a backup twin-lens reflex camera that I carried allowed me to complete my assignment.
 
Anything lomo. Cracked cameras, light leaks, plastic lenses, overlapping frames, you name it. Holgas and Diana will be the #1 for me.
Lomo aside I have a love/hate relationship with the B-series Prakticas. It was my first camera so my heart skips a bit when I see them in car boot sales but they all develop malfunctioning shutters - I haven't come across even one that works well.
 
Worse, as being the most failure prone, would probably be the Mamiya Z series (35mm format). Had a failure rate of probably 80%. You see few today. Close behind that is the Leica CL. High failure rate of the meter from the get go.

Worse, as personally buying a new camera and sending it back for repair numerous times until getting rid of it, that would have been my new Leica M4-2.
 
p.giannakis said:
Anything lomo. ...
Click to expand...

Dooood.

Dood.

My Lomo LC-A 120 is honestly fantastic.
Nothing else like it. AE with super wide lens in a tiny package? Spectacular pics.
It seems expensive until you realize there is nothing like it. Also crazy fun to use.



 
p.giannakis said:
Anything lomo. Cracked cameras, light leaks, plastic lenses, overlapping frames, you name it. Holgas and Diana will be the #1 for me.
Lomo aside I have a love/hate relationship with the B-series Prakticas. It was my first camera so my heart skips a bit when I see them in car boot sales but they all develop malfunctioning shutters - I haven't come across even one that works well.
Click to expand...

I have not encountered a single broken B series Praktica and I‘ve got 5 of them.
All the issues with the Lomos are actually features ;)
 
I never had any luck with any Kodak Retina camera.

These were always expensive and rather mechanically delicate cameras.
 
Huss said:
Dooood.

Dood.

My Lomo LC-A 120 is honestly fantastic.
Nothing else like it. AE with super wide lens in a tiny package? Spectacular pics.
It seems expensive until you realize there is nothing like it. Also crazy fun to use.
Click to expand...

These are very nice pictures Huss, never heard of this camera before.

santino said:
I have not encountered a single broken B series Praktica and I‘ve got 5 of them.
All the issues with the Lomos are actually features ;)
Click to expand...

I find it so difficult to believe it. Either you are extremely lucky or I am extremely unlucky.
 
Why this topic is in rangefinders sub forum?
Because all SLRs are worse than Rangefinders.

Boohaha, boohaha, boohaha.
 
The Yashica Electro 35. When they fail, and they will fail, no mechanical settings.
The Leica M8, how they still sell for more then $400 is beyond me.

I'm sure there are more but these two really stand out to me.
 
Deardorff38 said:
Sometimes 'the worst' can be the worst personal experience. After decades of relying on Nikons (along w Leica M) my personal worst was the newly issued Nikon F5. I couldn't rewind a single roll of film without the battery dying. Bought brand new, it went back to Nikon twice in the first 3 months and still the battery life issue was unresolved. Sold all the Nikon stuff, except an old F, and never looked back.
Click to expand...

So true on bad personal experience. Back about 1978, I acquired a Rolleiflex for less than $25 in a deal of a lifetime. I was so happy, having learned to love TLRs with a Yashica 124 MAT G. I could never bond with that great little camera. I finally gave it away to a family member who loves it and uses it to this day. Go figure.

narsuitus said:
...Back in the 1960s, Consumer Reports magazine declared that Miranda Sensorex was the “best buy for the money.” Their declaration had a great influence on my decision to select the Sensorex as my first SLR. However, my Sensorex broke three times within the first two years of its three-year warranty. The third time it broke was when I was hundreds of feet in the air covering the maiden voyage of a new aircraft that the local university had just acquired. Thank goodness a backup twin-lens reflex camera that I carried allowed me to complete my assignment.
Click to expand...

My father never missed purchasing a copy of their monthly magazine. About 1975 I purchased one of the magazines as it had a review of the relatively new Fujica ST 901. I had recently purchased that camera. Boy, did they put it down.

There were a couple or three major things, one being the fact that one had to push down the shutter release partway to activate the meter. The reviewer couldn't keep from activating the shutter. Just about all cameras went to that if they weren't already there.

I think he also put down the LED shutter readout in the viewfinder. Again, most went to that if they weren't already there.

Ah, the good old days.

As to the worst in my experience, besides the Rollieflex which admittedly was obviously my problem, I don't know. I don't have the experience with different models like many here. I do know that I tried to take crime scene photos with a dollar-two-ninety-eight Kodak of some kind that got me back in to photography and using SLRs. It wasn't the camera's fault though, it certainly wasn't intended for that purpose, and it looked like it had been ridden hard and put up wet. I had obtained better photos with a Minolta 16. :bang:
 
I have this. I like it. Its cute, quirky and fairly rare. It’s a Haneel Tri-Vision Stereo Camera from 1945. It’s a poorly designed excuse for a camera using poor design, crappy lens, junk body construction, flimsy film gates.l, 6 stereo pairs on a roll of 828.........just a Sweel Pioneer Stereo Camera, ahead of its time. It’s time still haven’t come. Glare ridden cheap finder, so lightweight it’s Impossible to trigger the shutter without moving the camera, exposures read by combos of numbers through three rear windows, cheap hinges back door a welcome mat for light leaks, single meniscus lenses, cheap tinny metal trim. The biggest selling point is that the inner metal framework which holds the insides is just a smidgen too wide for the moulded in attachment points on the Bakelite (and chopped up rags) body. This causes a stress condition which Will cause cracks through the body on any of the four corners. ......But, it’s Rare. And very much more extremely rare is it’s immediate forerunner the Kirk Stereo Camera from 1943.
med_U67835I1595101924.SEQ.0.jpg
 
Any 110 snapshot camera. Back in their heyday, every time you collected your photos from the chemist you were reminded how shockingly poor they were: grainy and fuzzy, barely able to hold up in a 4 in. print.
 
Konica FT-1. According to a recent search, it was the last slr made by Konica and for good reason. The one I had, for about three weeks before trading it for anything better, devoured batteries, the meter led’s would flash like a disco ball and it would occasionally crumple the film either on advance or rewind. As a bonus, various parts would become loose for no apparent reason.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom