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.
Bill Blackwell
Leica M Shooter
Maybe it's just me, but I don't see anything in the OP's question about if a camera failed or not. The question was which camera was the worst.
Certainly a high failure rate isn't a good thing, and I suppose it could be argued that such a camera would be classified as one of the 'worst.'
That being said, got any independently verifiable data to back up those percentages/claims?
Have never heard of any contemporaneous reports of meter issues with CLs under warranty. Those were, FWIW, Minoltas manufactured in Japan, not really Leicas.
The R4 was known to have issues but I've never read any reports that were as specific as the first 1000 having 100% failure rate; nor have I heard about a specific 30% failure rate figure on M4-2s. What exactly failed on those cameras?
The M9 situation of course is well-documented. The M8 coffee-stain, UV/IR filters, shutter issues, and Stephen Lee's aborted upgrade program are also well-documented.
That being said, got any independently verifiable data to back up those percentages/claims?
Have never heard of any contemporaneous reports of meter issues with CLs under warranty. Those were, FWIW, Minoltas manufactured in Japan, not really Leicas.
The R4 was known to have issues but I've never read any reports that were as specific as the first 1000 having 100% failure rate; nor have I heard about a specific 30% failure rate figure on M4-2s. What exactly failed on those cameras?
The M9 situation of course is well-documented. The M8 coffee-stain, UV/IR filters, shutter issues, and Stephen Lee's aborted upgrade program are also well-documented.
Bill Blackwell
Leica M Shooter
The issues with the CL did not involve the meter, but the meter switch - which was easily repaired. In fact meter failure rate on the CL is very low.
"It was as if Leica set out to design as bad a meter switch [on the CL] as they could!"
- Don Goldberg ("DAG")
David Hughes
David Hughes
I am always amazed by the number of people who claim to give exact failure rates for cameras; especially when we all know that the makers will do anything to avoid even mentioning it and, at the most, will be very vague.
Even stranger are those who can give such figures for events behind the " Iron Curtain" during the cold war. Especially if they cannot speak the language and were not even born at the time. I would expect the failure rates to be a state secret like many other figures, including telephone numbers and so on...
And as for all those Uranians who could speak perfect English and make up clever sound bites in English... I suspect they were helped a lot by, well, make a wild guess.
Regards, David
Even stranger are those who can give such figures for events behind the " Iron Curtain" during the cold war. Especially if they cannot speak the language and were not even born at the time. I would expect the failure rates to be a state secret like many other figures, including telephone numbers and so on...
And as for all those Uranians who could speak perfect English and make up clever sound bites in English... I suspect they were helped a lot by, well, make a wild guess.
Regards, David
p.giannakis
Pan Giannakis
Hi David,
It is quite easy to calculate exact failure rates: you see how many cameras you had and how many of them broke down. Now, how credible is that reported failure rate is a different question. If you had one camera and that one broke down, then not credible at all i would say - if you have been in the business and had multiple opportunities to try and test them, then i would imagine that it is starting to become quite credible.
For example: I've lost count of how many Yashica T4 i have bought, i find them in car boot sales and i always buy them because they sell like hot cakes on ebay. It is different saying that I bought 2 and one was faulty and different saying that I have bought more than ten and only 2 or3 actually worked as they should. That is why i would stay clear of T4 sold online.
I previously commented on the B-series Prakticas, I bought mine from new and treated it like a jewel. Failed within 5 years. Since I have this connection with the brand as being my first camera I bought, I had bought 2 BMS, 2 BCA, one B200 and one BX20. All of them died the same shutter death. For me, that is 100% fail rate. It is not a universal praktica failure rate but it does give an indication that those cameras do not age well.
There is someone thought that disagreed with me - does it mean i will change my view of the B-series? No, my personal experience with them is quite strong.
David Hughes
David Hughes
but we are talking/posting about the worst cameras of all time.
My individual time is nothing compared to the global picture. Also the more I like a camera the more it will suffer from wear and tear but that is normal for mechanical things. As I see it that is normal in the same way that I expect my shoes to wear out the soles and have them and the heels replaced...
As for buying in flea markets, well, would they be in a flea market for any other reason?
Apart from those that have flat batteries or else - normal I'm afraid - the owners didn't bother to read the instruction book and have just done something daft. Those are a good source of excellent but "broken" cameras. I'm thinking, f'instance, of those that lock up the mirror, lock the shutter button etc, etc...
Regards, David
My individual time is nothing compared to the global picture. Also the more I like a camera the more it will suffer from wear and tear but that is normal for mechanical things. As I see it that is normal in the same way that I expect my shoes to wear out the soles and have them and the heels replaced...
As for buying in flea markets, well, would they be in a flea market for any other reason?
Apart from those that have flat batteries or else - normal I'm afraid - the owners didn't bother to read the instruction book and have just done something daft. Those are a good source of excellent but "broken" cameras. I'm thinking, f'instance, of those that lock up the mirror, lock the shutter button etc, etc...
Regards, David
Jason Schneider
the Camera Collector
Worst camera marketing machinations
Worst camera marketing machinations
I get the sarcasm, and one of the primary tasks of marketing mavens is indeed selling dissatisfaction--with everything from your less than pearly white teeth to your present DSLR, and then entice you to buy whatever product they're flogging. However the strategy most often used in camera ads is aspirational-- to entice you to buy a camera with all the latest "must have" features, rather than to convince you that the camera you recently bought is a worthless piece of crap (and, by implication, that you're a bloody fool).
Worst camera marketing machinations
I get the sarcasm, and one of the primary tasks of marketing mavens is indeed selling dissatisfaction--with everything from your less than pearly white teeth to your present DSLR, and then entice you to buy whatever product they're flogging. However the strategy most often used in camera ads is aspirational-- to entice you to buy a camera with all the latest "must have" features, rather than to convince you that the camera you recently bought is a worthless piece of crap (and, by implication, that you're a bloody fool).
BillBingham2
Registered User
Kodak has a pretty good group of optical engineers working on lenses.
IMHO not the worst.
B2 (;->
Pál_K
Cameras. I has it.
They do -- or did. Same with Polaroid: the lenses on SX-70's, SLR680's, SLR690's, as well as those like the Model 180, 190 are very good.
As I called out before, I still think Petri SLRs had the worst reputation in the early 1970s.
Ambro51
Collector/Photographer
i suppose the ONLY worst camera we can ALL agree upon is that God Damn Fotron!!
Beemermark
Veteran
I based my conclusions on having been a dealer at trade shows across the Mid-West from about 1980 to 1994. I shouldn't have given percentages since total number of failures vs number made is unknown. 1st, as an engineer, I define "worse" any product that cannot due what it was designed to do, or do it reliably.
Search the internet for R4 failures. Numbers below 1,600,000 had electronic failures. The serial number is well known since Leica refused repair on any model below that number. Since production started with SN 1,546,351 that's a whole lot of failed cameras. While it's possible that some might have survived I never saw one. While a joint design with Minolta, Leica did the electronics "their way" (note the Minolta XD-11/7 never had issues). Ditto on the CL. All those meter-less CL's on eBay didn't die of old age, they died soon after they left the factory. Of the hundreds of the CL's I saw at hundred of shows most had non-working meters. Don't remember if the Minolta CL was better but the Minolta CLE had very few issues. And I'm not saying the CL is a bad camera to use, I just put it in the worse category because it did not perform well as designed.
Search the internet for R4 failures. Numbers below 1,600,000 had electronic failures. The serial number is well known since Leica refused repair on any model below that number. Since production started with SN 1,546,351 that's a whole lot of failed cameras. While it's possible that some might have survived I never saw one. While a joint design with Minolta, Leica did the electronics "their way" (note the Minolta XD-11/7 never had issues). Ditto on the CL. All those meter-less CL's on eBay didn't die of old age, they died soon after they left the factory. Of the hundreds of the CL's I saw at hundred of shows most had non-working meters. Don't remember if the Minolta CL was better but the Minolta CLE had very few issues. And I'm not saying the CL is a bad camera to use, I just put it in the worse category because it did not perform well as designed.
Forest_rain
Well-known
I haven't had good luck with Praktica cameras...I got two broken ones in a row. Maybe rumors about FSU camera reliability are true. I decided to stick to Japanese cameras which seem mostly reliable, for me anyway.
David Hughes
David Hughes
Is this the film camera we are discussing? Not suffering from old age?
The film Leica CL was made in 1973 and my guess about those on eBay is that they are nearly 50 years old...
Regards, David
That may very well be. However, my first SLR was a Petriflex V, lesser sibling of the Petriflex VII as I recall. Top shutter speed of 1/500 I think, and a Canon-like breechlock bayonet lens mount. Bought it at the Base Exchange on the NATO/USAF airbase near Izmir Turkey late in 1963. Used it quite a lot around Izmir, on my 2-week leave in Istanbul and Paris on the way stateside, and around Rapid City SD. It worked well, don't recall any failures or complaints. I also got a pre-set Spiratone 105mm lens for it. At some point I traded it in at the local camera shop on a new Pentax H3v... I don't recall why... that was late 1964 so I used the Petri for a year.
David Hughes
David Hughes
Prektica were made in Germany at the old Contax works, weren't they?
Zorki were made in a part of the old USSR that few see are truly belonging there and only FED were made in Russia.
The problem with secondhand cameras, and cars, and so on is not their reliability but the sense of the previous owners. How well they looked after the cameras comes into it more than anything else.
Most owners never read the instruction books - look at the handfull on ebay for sale with the instruction book as proof. And someimes I think they don't even know their camera needs batteries as I've bought dozens cheaply with dead batteries and half used films in them.
Then add in digital in the 90's and my guess is that the cameras were then abandoned in favour of digital and after 20 or more years sold cheaply or given to a charity shop.
Expensive cameras - on the other hand - were pampered and looked after and survived, although a few slipped through needing work on them. Luckily they can usually be rescued but it costs money and most don't bother. Expensive to repair is not the same as unreliable and unrepairable...
The next owner then blames the makers and so on.
How many blame forums for telling people - who don't know one end of a screwdriver from the other - how easy it is to repair cameras?
My experience of telling people not to attempt to repair things (as it could be very dangerous) is that some see that as a challenge.
Regards, David
CharlesDAMorgan
Veteran
Yep. Must be easy, someone on the internet's done it.
I came to the conclusion that most people asking for advice on forums are actually looking for affirmation rather than sober honesty. I once restored an old Mercedes, and in stripping it became intimately acquainted with how much they rust in invisible places. The bodyshop strip down then found even more - this on a car with no visible corrosion. Someone else then decided he too could restore one himself (with no metalworking skills but a firm belief that he could master welding). The car he found was expensive, and rust was visible on every cavity. Only I said don't - it will be a total waste of time. The only person not thanked for his comment was me.
We all know the end result - car had no metal behind the underseal including chassis members, he could not weld, she got pregnant, and 18 months later he scrapped it - at least £4,000 poorer.
At least with a camera it's only a couple of hundred quid (well, was...)
Kai-san
Filmwaster
The Praktica cameras originated from KW (Kamera Werkstätten Guthe & Thorsch) in Dresden which after the war ended up in eastern Germany (DDR). They were eventually merged into the Pentacon works.
Zorkis were made in Krasnogorsk which is in the Moscow district and which certainly belongs to Russia.
The FEDs were made in Kharkov in Ukraine.
David Hughes
David Hughes
Thanks, I don't know how I reversed that but I guess the terminal boredom from lockdown is causing brain fade...
Regards, David
PS Just checked now at day 135 of lockdown!
gavinlg
Veteran
edit: Smena 8m. Literally junk.