-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Camera you love vs camera you hate...
- Thread starter Sam Bennett
- Start date
Hal Wilson
Senior Member
- Messages
- 1,192
- Reaction score
- 1,305
Plenty. There's a world outside of your experience. Please try to understand this.
But this isn't jsut about YOU. This is the bit you really, really don't seem to be getting. And you've kind of proven my point about one mans' 'flaw' is another man's 'positive feature'. So thanks for that.
So we're into the realms of anecdotes. Your experience doesn't speak for anyone else, please try to understand this. The fact Nikon released a 'Press' version of the F3, with a hotshoe on the prism, speaks volumes as to how a camera manufacturer had to listen to many complaints from pros.
Well you couldn't mount a regular hot shoe flash without having to buy an adapter. Fact.
Eh? I've used a 500CM on a tripod without issue. Why would I comment on it when it isn't actually a problem? I think you're now into the realm of making things up to try to win an argument. This really is clutching at straws.
Again; the vast majority of cameras used by NASA were/are unmodified stock units, and the vast majority of photography carried out by NASA was done on Earth. NASA chose Hasselblad (and Nikon, and other brands) for good reasons.
Ok, so using terms like 'triggered' is just getting ridiculous. And enough with the revisionism; you called the designer/s of the 500CM 'fools':
"Medium format the camera I hated the most was my Hasselblad 500CM, one of the most overrated cameras of all time, designed by a fool and had a long list of flaws."
Challenging such a crass statement is hardly being 'triggered'. The effort you've put into your multiple attempts to try to assert your opinions, plus your clear defensiveness, reveals it's not me who's 'triggered'...
But let's put this to bed; it's got way past boring. Let's draw a line under it and agree to disagree. I think we can safely assume that the designers of Hasselblad cameras aren't fools, is the end of it.
tbcass
Forum Pro
What I see a lot is people focusing on negatives while ignoring positives. Using anything is a balance where you have to take the good with the bad. The 500CM was used by many studio photographers because of the superb image quality which was more important than any negatives. This continues to this day where people say they hate camera x because of some little thing despite the fact the camera takes great photos.
Pretty. much all current cameras take great photos, there's really no need to buy, or use, a camera you don't like.
tbcass
Forum Pro
The reason's people give for not liking a camera are about unimportant issues that could easily be overcome with a week or two of use. It's all about negative thinking.
Sam Bennett
Veteran Member
I've been using the camera that inspired me to start this thread for nearly two years.
Stay tuned for a Question of the Week on this subject 
.
.Hal Wilson
Senior Member
- Messages
- 1,192
- Reaction score
- 1,305
Quite. I'm actually struggling to think of a 'bad' camera I've used. I didn't like my Canon AE-1 I bought as a student, but that was more about personal preferences; I didn't get on with the ergonomics of the thing. I sold it with a bunch of lenses to buy a Nikon FM2. Probably my least favourite film camera to date. The Hasselblad 500cm I had for a little while; it was at the time quite a bit cheaper than other Hassy models on the used market. I much preferred it to the Mamiya's in college; the RB- and RZ-67s, and the C220/330s. But those were still excellent cameras. The Leica M4 I had for a very short while just didn't work for me as I explained earlier in the thread. I wouldn't say it was 'flawed' though, or the designer was a 'fool'.
I did until quite recently own a Canon EOS-1, alongside my Nikon AF SLRS. Bought it cheap, was curious about this 'legendary' camera. Not at all bad; its AF system was definitely better than Nikon's at the time. But little ergonomic quirks niggled me, and I never put much film through it. Happily sold it on for a profit.
I've recently got reaquainted with the Pentax K1000, that I bought off my old college when they had a massive clearout of all the film photography stuff to make way for the digital age. A huge mistake as it turned out ( a decision made by an idiot of a new manger who proved as popular as Cholera there), as interest in photography courses dropped off a cliff at the same time. Nobody was really interested in learning photography, as you could just buy a digital camera and it would do it all for you, or at least you could see where you were going wrong instantly. But then came the great film revival. The K1000 is almost the perfect learning tool, as it's so simple and intuitive. I'd overlooked it myself as a student, scoffed at it even, but I'm discovering what a fantastic camera it actually is.
So yeah; 'hatred' is something I reserve for say evil people, or vile cultural practices etc, not for photographic equipment. That's just weird.
Oh actually I have to make an exception there for the Yashica MG-1 I had as a kid. That was horrible, almost put me off photography for life. Nasty thing. I'd still say I despised, more than actually hated, it though.
Last edited:
tbcass
Forum Pro
The first camera I owned was a really cheap very old 35mm that I found in a drawer at my parents house back in the 1960s. It took terrible photos and was very difficult to use but I loved it and it inspired me to take up photography as a hobby. Here's a sample.
--
Tom
landshark
Senior Member
It is more than obvious that your experience with all these cameras is limited at best.
You do not really understand the day to day needs of making your living with the tool.
The reason they were fools is because it took them years to correct a fundamental issue with the camera. Hassy rode on it's reputation into the sunset until they were saved by Fuji. I never said they were incapable of taking sharp usable images, I said they went out of alignment too easily. If you used a Hassy on a tripod without a speed crank as you said then you were shooting pretty slowly. I cannot tell you how many conversations I had with Haselblads, how many seminars of theirs I went to, even the sad ones where they tried to sell the virtue of the square format as they were losing sales to both the 6X7 and 6x4.5 cameras. Maybe foolish is too harsh let's call them proud, stubborn with a design flaw they ignored for too long.
Maybe some were disappointed with the intro of the F3 that it did not have the hot shoe on the prism top, Nikon brought that out after 3 years but it still was not a TTL hot shoe though. Let's not forget that one of the selling points of the F3 as well as earlier Nikons was the interchangeable prisms, at least 5 different ones for the F3 which for most was more important than a hot shoe on top. If one had been a Nikon shooter both the Nikon F and F2 had all been using the same hot shoe over the rewind knob, so it was something they were already doing. If one really wants to discuss what the biggest issue with the hot shoe location. It was that unless you were using a motor you had to take it off to rewind the film.
Many times people become emotional about what they use and do not mind the work a rounds their camera may have. We say it is just getting used to it, probably true for most cameras. Like loading film into a Leica, those shooters do not mind it, but it is one of the more awkward cameras to load. When the backs are loose, one is not sure the film is flat and one losses confidence in their tool
Oh I almost forgot I am still using a Hassy camera it is just attached to my DJI drone
So your are right and I do agree this has become pretty boring and I will retire from this discussion. Good day
Bob
Please Do not copy, edit or use photos without permission from me
Login • Instagram
Welcome back to Instagram. Sign in to check out what your friends, family & interests have been capturing & sharing around the world.
www.instagram.com
Sam Bennett
Veteran Member
Yeah, my hope originally getting the S5 II was that it would pair nicely with the G9 II and have a minimum of "cognitive load" switching between one and the other. Since those cameras obviously work for you, it must be nice!
As you know, I'm considering the S1 II since it addresses many of the problems I have with the S5 II. But ultimately it's still just a big, heavy, awkward camera and I'm not sure I'll be able to let that go. The difference between having the S5 II + 35/1.8 on my hip vs the OM-3 + 17/1.8 is just immense. As I said before, this is my secondary camera and having something that's in a relatively compact package matters to me in a way it likely doesn't matter for most. I use this setup in very narrow spaces, cluttered with standards to keep the barricade up - what concert photographers call "the pit". You can't tell super well from this shot, but it is very tight and my gear has the battle scars to show for it!
That seems to be the majority opinion here, which is nice to see. I can see how Lumix would be a great solution for you since you're a hybrid user, but since I'm stills-focused I prefer my OMS gear.
--
Sam Bennett
Instagram: @swiftbennett
That might be partially true but there are enough cameras on the market that, aside from a possible commitment to a lens mount, there's no reason to overcome much. As an example, I don't like retro style cameras, no problem I can buy a modern style camera with similar performance that takes the same lenses.
Hal Wilson
Senior Member
- Messages
- 1,192
- Reaction score
- 1,305
My MG-1 didn't only take terrible photos (very poor light meter, and poor quality lens), it often just didn't bother working properly at all. It was big, it was heavy, the focussing was crap. I put a few rolls through it and then just gave up with it. It sat idle for some years (it was a gift from a relative, and not a very thoughtful one because it was just their old cast off and they hadn't liked it either!), and I think in the end it may well have just gone int he bin or to a junk shop or something. Fortunately, I subsequently got back into photography properly with an old Praktica of some kind; really basic, made a K1000 look sophisticated! Again, the lens wasn't great, but it did at least focus properly, and metered reasonably well. I'd also had a Zenit Lomo LC-A; that wasn't very good but it was fun to shoot with, and tiny, so it could go in a pocket. It astonishes me to see just how much they go for on Ebay etc now. Daft. But I've had some pretty low end cameras that have been a lot of un, I have to say. Even an old basic Polaroid thing in the early '80s. If a camera is fun to use, then it's a good camera imo.
Lol! I see someone just had to have to last word. :-D Oh dear. Mind; I'd forgotten about the film rewinding issue with the F3 and a flash fitted to the standard accessory shoe. No that was a major design flaw imo, especially in 1980. TTL flash was still fairly new back then, and most 3rd party flash units didn't do TTL, but prior to the F3, many pros used large gripped/hammerhead type flashes, connected via PC cord. The Nikon FE of 1978 had a hot shoe with an additional contact for the flash ready light in the viewfinder, so why Nikon didn't implement TTL via a hotshoe on the F3, is a bit of a mystery to me. Even the Nikon EM of 1979 had two contacts on the hotshoe to transmit information to the SB-E flash. So it was definitely doable. We had to wait until the FE2 of 1983, for a Nikon SLR with a TTL hotshoe. Olympus had done it seven years earlier...
Yeah, Having to take the flash adapter off the F3 to rewind the film, that was a great feature for 1980! We can perhaps forgive the previous F.x generations for this, as they'll most likely have used thyristor flash units connected via a PC cord and mounted on a bracket, but on the F3, this was unforgivable.
UNFORGIVABLE.
Last edited:
Well, this weekend, for the first time shooting the grand kids on a full size soccer field, I found I needed something longer than a 70-200 zoom, so I'll be using a m43 body and lens next time out myself, probably an OM-1 with 40-150+1.4x. No way am I going to lug around two FF cameras with long zooms all day.
I'm concluding that, as for full frame cameras, the S1ii is a much better fit for me than an S5ii/X for hybrid use, but there is still uses for my m43 gear as well, especially with the longer lenses.
I hope you find the optimum combination of body and lenses for your use case.
Joe L
I'm concluding that, as for full frame cameras, the S1ii is a much better fit for me than an S5ii/X for hybrid use, but there is still uses for my m43 gear as well, especially with the longer lenses.
I hope you find the optimum combination of body and lenses for your use case.
Joe L
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum