Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Rangefinder Forum > Rangefinder Photography Discussion

Rangefinder Photography Discussion General discussions about Rangefinder Photography. This is a great place for questions and answers that are not addressed in a specific category. Take note there is also a General Photography forum.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Old 12-21-2010   #41
al1966
Feed Your Head
 
al1966's Avatar
 
al1966 is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: UK
Age: 51
Posts: 604
Nikon D200 it had suspect af and the iq was no place near the fuji s3
A Seagull TLR feels horrible to use though I do quite like the square format for portraits.
__________________
Life is a series of photographs surrounded by the worthless bits

http://jamesagrady.blog.com/
http://randompicture.wordpress.com/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-21-2010   #42
Chris101
summicronia
 
Chris101's Avatar
 
Chris101 is offline
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Arizona
Posts: 4,305
Bummer.

I've never shot a camera I didn't enjoy. Sure some are more ergonomic than others, and some are built like little tanks while others are barely held together plastic. But they are all fun!
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-21-2010   #43
gavinlg
Registered User
 
gavinlg's Avatar
 
gavinlg is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Wellington NZ
Posts: 4,936
Nikon FM2n - much loved by the nikon collective, but I couldn't deal with the film advance 'step'/shutter lock that made it impossible for me to hold it vertically without the advance lever sticking into my eyebrow. Drove me crazy. Besides that, I wasn't crazy about the nikkor lenses either.

Yashica electro gsn - Bought 3-4 of these after witnessing the hype and seeing some gorgeous images taken by them on this forum and flickr. Each one had some debilitating problem that made it non-functional. With the money I spent trying to buy 'mint' ones I could have just bought a nice OM set or even a canon f1 body. Also, they're ergonomically akin to a brick, and trying to find the rangefinder patch in the VF is like trying to find the loch ness monster in a puddle on the road.

Canon EF 50mm f1.4 - a very average lens. Fine over f2, hazy and useless at f1.4

Every Nikkor I've used (35/2, 28/2.8, 50/1.8, 50/1.4G, 85/1.4, 18-200) - Never met a nikkor I really like. Not sure why - just seem to prefer most other brands lenses.

Minolta AF plastic SLR - Some midrange dynax or maxxum SLR my dad used to use - had little plastic rocker switches to adjust shutter and aperture which were impossible to use quickly, and the lens had a solid smooth rubber focus ring which really bugged me for some reason.
__________________
NO PRAISE
@gavinlagrange
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-21-2010   #44
wlewisiii
StayAtHome Dad & Photog
 
wlewisiii's Avatar
 
wlewisiii is offline
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Madison, WI
Age: 53
Posts: 5,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris101 View Post
Bummer.

I've never shot a camera I didn't enjoy. Sure some are more ergonomic than others, and some are built like little tanks while others are barely held together plastic. But they are all fun!
I can agree with the idea that all of them have been fun in many, if not most, ways. Yet some cameras come into my hands with so much hype that reality leaves me significantly dissapointed. The OM was especially egregious in this respect.
__________________
My Gallery
My Best Pictures

Playing and learning daily with: 4x5 Crown Graphic, Leica IIIf w/ 50/2 Summitar, Nikon F2 Photomic w/ 50/1.4 & Olympus E-PL1.

"Some people are 'the glass is half full' types. Some people are 'the glass is half empty' types. I'm a 'the glass is full of radioactive waste and I just drank half of it' type. And I'm still thirsty." -- Bill Mattocks
  Reply With Quote

TVSiii
Old 12-21-2010   #45
scottgee1
RF renegade
 
scottgee1 is offline
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 575
TVSiii

My T3 is a desert island camera so I thought I'd like the TVSiii. As much as I tried, I couldn't like it -- fiddly, ergonomics were odd. Despite the fine lens, I sold it.
__________________
<a href='http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showgallery.php?cat=500&ppuser=1058'>My Gallery</a>
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-21-2010   #46
Nando
Registered User
 
Nando's Avatar
 
Nando is offline
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Sault Ste Marie, Canada & Coimbra, Portugal
Age: 41
Posts: 1,140
My first, only and perhaps last DSLR - a Canon 300D. I hated everything about that camera. Luckily it was stolen from me.

Other disappointments were a Zorki 1c and a Flexaret. Both kept braking down. With the money I spent on the Zorki and the various repairs on it, I could have purchased the real deal. However, I didn't have very high expectations from these cameras.
__________________
"Oui, non, oui, non, OUI!" - Henri Cartier-Bresson

Fernando Gomes Semedo - flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-21-2010   #47
rphenning
Registered User
 
rphenning is offline
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Southern California
Age: 28
Posts: 183
canon mark III, all 2.8 L zooms. Terrible set for me.
__________________
www
tumblr
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-21-2010   #48
SolaresLarrave
My M5s need red dots!
 
SolaresLarrave's Avatar
 
SolaresLarrave is offline
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: DeKalb, IL, USA
Age: 57
Posts: 7,387
Several purchases that failed to meet my expectations.

Anything Med Format. Never got into it. Never could. Never wlll.

Yashica GS. For some reason, I thought it'd be like the Canonet III QL-17 that got me into rangefinders, but it wasn't. It was bigger, ugly, unwieldy... I just didn't like it.

Kiev camera
. Got curious about FSU cameras while my M3 was in Don's shop, so I purchased one with two lenses. First, I couldn't wrap my mind around the lens mount and the focusing wheel. Then, the viewfinder was dismal. I sold it with the two lenses it came with, but I never ran film through it.

Right now, I falling out of love with my Nikon S2 kit. Reason? I only can use a 50mm lens (it's a beauty...), and any equipment expansion (like a fast 35mm or almost anything) will cost me more than a Leica... and will have to use viewfinders. I may send it out for repair (the RF is slightly out of line) and then sell it... Probably to regret it, but then, I have now a nice M5 to keep me company!
__________________
-Francisco
Check out
My Leica M4-2 Blog and/or
My Nikon D700 Neophyte's Guide
Now selling Nikon RF gear
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-21-2010   #49
FrankS
Registered User
 
FrankS's Avatar
 
FrankS is offline
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Canada, eh.
Age: 60
Posts: 19,434
These just didn't do it for me: (YMMV)

Yashica Electro
Contax RF pre and post war
Nikon S RF (later ones are probably better)
Kiev RF
Olympus XA - several with reliability issues
Minox 35 cameras - several with reliability issues
Canon AE1 and A1 slr's (love the F1, EF and FTb though)
Mamiya TLR - advantage with interchangeable lenses, but feels crude compared to Rolleiflex
any half frame camera - 35mm frame is already small
__________________
my little website: http://frankfoto.jimdo.com/

photography makes me happy

Last edited by FrankS : 12-21-2010 at 19:38.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-21-2010   #50
Sam N
Registered User
 
Sam N's Avatar
 
Sam N is offline
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: California
Posts: 561
I can't think of and really big gear disappointments, but maybe that's because I have lowish expectations and do a lot of (way too much) research.

A couple smaller ones:

Mamiya 645 AF - Optics were fine, but AF and use are SOO clunky compared to a modern Canon/Nikon SLR (film or digital).

Rolleicord V - Who thought it would be a good idea to have a shutter lever instead of a button? On a large format lens I can see this, but not on a camera designed to be handheld.

Toy cameras / lomography in general - The fisheye is fun very occasionally, but the action sampler / octomat is just a horrible waste of film.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-21-2010   #51
Krosya
Konicaze
 
Krosya's Avatar
 
Krosya is offline
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 3,499
Overhyped : Leica M3, M6, IIIF - none were "perfect for me" and all needed CLA/repair.
Every Yashica RF camera - all had mechanical/functioning problems.
Most Leica lenses - not bad, but ones I tried made by other brands in same FLs were as good or better.
Fuji MF - none were as great in actual use as some other brands similar cameras.
Mamiya 645 and RB/Z 67 - just way too large for my taste.
Olympus RF cameras - just didnt feel comfortable in use nor were as great as I expected based on pictures I have seen from similar cameras, and that was AFTER CLAs.

I have tried many cameras over the years and now I'm finally pretty happy with what I have.
__________________
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
35mm Rangefinders : Leica M5 and RD1S w/ many M and LTM lenses

Folders
:
Welta Weltur 6x6/645, Welta Weltur 6x9/645


flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-21-2010   #52
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
 
Chriscrawfordphoto's Avatar
 
Chriscrawfordphoto is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana
Age: 41
Posts: 7,833
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonmanjiro View Post
Hasselblad 503CX with 80/2.8 - nice enough kit, but painfully slow to focus and use. How on earth do people use these for shooting on the street? Hasselblad should be spelled "Hassle" blad
You don't. They're studio cameras, not reportage cameras, lol. I have the same kit, plus the 50mm and 150mm lenses and I LOVE mine. I use it for landscapes and architecture. A Rollei TLR is a much nicer street medium format camera if you want square format; a Mamiya 645 Pro with wind grip if you want something that handles like a big 35mm.
__________________
Christopher Crawford
Fine Art Photography
Fort Wayne, Indiana

Back home again in Indiana

http://www.chriscrawfordphoto.com

My Technical Info pages: Film Developing times, scanning, printing, editing.

Buy My Prints in RFF Classifieds

Support My Work on Patreon
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-21-2010   #53
back alley
IMAGES
 
back alley's Avatar
 
back alley is offline
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: true north strong & free
Posts: 48,316
tlrs...make me dizzy.
__________________
heart soul & a camera

xt 20/xe 2/xe 1
16/23/23/27/35/50/56/55-200
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-21-2010   #54
PlantedTao
Registered User
 
PlantedTao's Avatar
 
PlantedTao is offline
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Emerald City
Age: 40
Posts: 362
A M5, thought I would like the build and shutter compared to my Bessa R2... it was too bulky and I hated the viewfinder. It does have a quite shutter though. I miss my R2, but will never miss the M5, it really is a beast of a RF.
__________________
My Gallery

  Reply With Quote

Old 12-21-2010   #55
jonmanjiro
Moderator
 
jonmanjiro's Avatar
 
jonmanjiro is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Yokohama
Posts: 4,897
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chriscrawfordphoto View Post
You don't. They're studio cameras, not reportage cameras <snip>
yeah, no kidding. took me all of 5 minutes to figure that out once i had it in my hands but some people do use them on the street, and very well too. i take my hat off to them.
__________________
flickr
Instagram

Last edited by jonmanjiro : 12-21-2010 at 20:27.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-21-2010   #56
kemal_mumcu
Registered User
 
kemal_mumcu's Avatar
 
kemal_mumcu is offline
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Dakar
Posts: 245
Polaroid. Actually the idea is kinda fun and funky but the Polaroid one-six hundred camera looks and feels like it should belong in a kitchen drawer.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-21-2010   #57
AldPixto
Registered User
 
AldPixto is offline
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 3
Olympus XA - images, especially corners, didn't look as sharp as Minox 35s or Rollei 35S. electronics problems - on humid days the self-timer would 'self-activate' when clam shell was opened, other times shutter wouldn't fire.

Rollei 35S - controls were ergonomic nightmare - hold down tab with one hand, turn dial with other hand. not so bad if I used a tripod, but then what was the point of such a small camera?

Contax G2 - many shots with 90mm were out of focus. Sold it after a few years when I realized I kept unconsciously favoring my Hexar AF over the G2.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-21-2010   #58
Frank Petronio
-
 
Frank Petronio's Avatar
 
Frank Petronio is offline
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Rochester, NY, USA
Posts: 1,877
Any zoom lens. All the Russian items I've tried. Anything Lomo. A Zeiss 50/2 M that wobbled. Seagull TLR. Zeiss Tengor box camera... All pinholes. Auto-Focus cameras from before 1995 other than the Hexar AF. 4x5 Super Speed Graphic. Toyo cameras. Cambo cameras. All 120 folders. Nikon large format lenses. The Mamiya 6, RB, and the Polaroid 600. And the Fuji 6x17. And the Aero Ektar on Speed Graphic. And the Polaroid 110 to 4x5 conversions - the convertors are nice enough but the camera itself is a POS.

I used to use Nikon FMs and FEs in the 80s but when I tried them again recently I saw how crappy they were compared to the Leicas and F-bodies I used afterwards.

And the absolute worst? A $2400 professional Sony FP-3 small-sensor digicam I bought in 1999... based on this model: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/spec.../sony_d770.asp Biggest screwing of my life.

Basically the high-end brands have mostly been great. Vintage Graflex and Kodaks, Leica, many Nikons, the Fuji 6x9 series, Rollei, Sinar, Arca, Hasselblad, Schneider, Rodenstock... the all-time best has been Linhof. But that sounds snobby... all the Olympus Stylii with the fixed 35mm have been awesome, even the ones I bought for $8.

Last edited by Frank Petronio : 12-22-2010 at 03:27.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-21-2010   #59
Vincent.G
平和、愛、喜び
 
Vincent.G's Avatar
 
Vincent.G is offline
Join Date: Sep 2009
Age: 39
Posts: 1,359
Most camera bodies and lenses that are often-discussed-about and overhyped in forums and review websites. The ones that I get without reading too much about them on the Internet tends to suit me.
__________________
My Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-21-2010   #60
Keith
On leave from Gallifrey
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Keith is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,457
Quote:
Originally Posted by 35mmdelux View Post
Zeiss 50mm/1.4 ZF was a humongous disappointment. Zeiss would have been better off calling it f/2.0.


????????

I have one of these and I use it for Digital and film and love it!

In fact I just tested mine on two different bodies out of curiosity and it reads a grey card the same as my Sekonic L308s at f2 and f1.4
__________________
---------------------------
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-21-2010   #61
gavinlg
Registered User
 
gavinlg's Avatar
 
gavinlg is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Wellington NZ
Posts: 4,936
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith View Post
????????

I have one of these and I use it for Digital and film and love it!

In fact I just tested mine on two different bodies out of curiosity and it reads a grey card the same as my Sekonic L308s at f2 and f1.4
I think he's referring to wide open optical performance rather than actual light transmission performance...

The cool thing about Zeiss is that they made two 50s - one that's deadly sharp wide open and another that's a character lens wide open. Best of both worlds.
__________________
NO PRAISE
@gavinlagrange
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-21-2010   #62
Keith
On leave from Gallifrey
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Keith is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,457
Quote:
Originally Posted by fdigital View Post
I think he's referring to wide open optical performance rather than actual light transmission performance...

The cool thing about Zeiss is that they made two 50s - one that's deadly sharp wide open and another that's a character lens wide open. Best of both worlds.

I can't really fault that either Gavin!

As a matter of curiosity ... with your gripe about the FM's cocked out lever that sort of irked me a bit with my FM3A when I first got but now I'm used to it.

You never considered shooting vertically 'shutter down?'
__________________
---------------------------
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-21-2010   #63
gavinlg
Registered User
 
gavinlg's Avatar
 
gavinlg is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Wellington NZ
Posts: 4,936
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith View Post
I can't really fault that either Gavin!

As a matter of curiosity ... with your gripe about the FM's cocked out lever that sort of irked me a bit with my FM3A when I first got but now I'm used to it.

You never considered shooting vertically 'shutter down?'
Well for what it's worth the wide open picture you sent me demonstrated a very sharp lens @ f1.4!

With the FM's lever lock - I actually tried to shoot 'shutter down' for a while, but anytime I took my mind off the camera and saw something I wanted to shoot, I'd just instinctively raise it the 'shutter up', and poke myself in the brow again! I have to admit though, even if it weren't for that 'feature' I probably wouldn't have kept it... OM's and canon SLRs gel better with me (and I couldn't tell you why!)
__________________
NO PRAISE
@gavinlagrange
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-21-2010   #64
jonmanjiro
Moderator
 
jonmanjiro's Avatar
 
jonmanjiro is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Yokohama
Posts: 4,897
Quote:
Originally Posted by fdigital View Post
Well for what it's worth the wide open picture you sent me demonstrated a very sharp lens @ f1.4!

With the FM's lever lock - I actually tried to shoot 'shutter down' for a while, but anytime I took my mind off the camera and saw something I wanted to shoot, I'd just instinctively raise it the 'shutter up', and poke myself in the brow again! I have to admit though, even if it weren't for that 'feature' I probably wouldn't have kept it... OM's and canon SLRs gel better with me (and I couldn't tell you why!)
Are you a left eye shooter, Gavin? I can see the advance lever being a pain for left eye shooters. But luckily I'm a right eye shooter so it doesn't bother me.

I've heard of some users modifying their FM2/FE2/FM3A's so that the power is not turned off when the advance lever is returned to the stowaway position. A fairly simple mod from memory...
__________________
flickr
Instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-21-2010   #65
gavinlg
Registered User
 
gavinlg's Avatar
 
gavinlg is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Wellington NZ
Posts: 4,936
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonmanjiro View Post
Are you a left eye shooter, Gavin? I can see the advance lever being a pain for left eye shooters. But luckily I'm a right eye shooter so it doesn't bother me.

I've heard of some users modifying their FM2/FE2/FM3A's so that the power is not turned off when the advance lever is returned to the stowaway position. A fairly simple mod from memory...
Nope, I'm not even a left eyed shooter! I swear I have normal features too - my brow is very average in size! Even if the lock wasn't present on the FMs, I'd have an f3 anyday - it's the one nikon SLR I really liked... Just felt special in use and I loved the look and feel of it.
__________________
NO PRAISE
@gavinlagrange
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-21-2010   #66
pvdhaar
Zoom with your feet!
 
pvdhaar's Avatar
 
pvdhaar is offline
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 3,159
Most overhyped piece of rubbish: the first generation Nikon 24-120 AFD. I had one of the early ones, and it was bad, really really bad.

That lens had the bends.. at 35mm the pincushion distortion was so bad, that it was completely unusable. The distortion became acceptable from 50mm onwards, but there softness was the problem. You couldn't make a decent picture unless stopped down to f11-f16. The only focal length that was anyway near passable was 24mm; no distortion and decently sharp at f8.

This was the worst Nikon lens I've ever used. Nikon must have noticed too; when I look at the photozone tests, it's clear that Nikon must have changed something in the production process somewhere along the way. The photozone sample has barrel distortion at 24 and that way corrects the atrocious bends mine had at 35. Either that or the production quality control was ran by a moron.
__________________
Kind regards,

Peter

My Hexländer Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-21-2010   #67
Melvin
Flim Forever!
 
Melvin's Avatar
 
Melvin is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 440
'70s Canon SLR with zoom lens I had as a teenager in the '80s. It sucked! My Argus "brick" that I got for $10 at the pawn shop took better pictures. I also hated my Nikkormat. It was an SLR but it wouldn't frame accurately, so what's the point?
The Leica M5 was the first really good camera I used, and I was already over 30.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-21-2010   #68
flip
良かったね!
 
flip's Avatar
 
flip is offline
Join Date: May 2008
Location: San Mateo, CA
Posts: 1,218
Fujifilm finepix f30 - bought it for it:s performance in low light - which was quite good. However, I was reminded constantly how much I hate menus, 3x4 framing, viewscreens, shutter lag, and the overall digicam experience.
__________________
Back in the Bay and looking for work.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-21-2010   #69
stupid leica
i don't shoot rf
 
stupid leica's Avatar
 
stupid leica is offline
Join Date: Aug 2009
Age: 32
Posts: 295
Zeiss Ikon. I may catch some flack for this, but i just was really let down by it. GREAT camera, very capable and all that. AMAZING finder... when it's aligned. Mine drifted in and out of good vertical alignment for the few months i had it. The batteries would also die incredibly fast. Camera had no personality or soul.

Every Voigtlander Bessa.

Every SLR-mount Pancake lens around 40mm. Every one of them is boring and overblown. Had both CV's in Nikon AI mount- they were lame. Had the Pentax 40, it was lame. I've used the Nikon 45, it is just overpriced.

Olympus OM2(n)... great camera, great system, but i really really wish it had AE lock. I much prefer my FE2's to the OM2n.

Olympus XA. Really neat camera, but i just couldn't get into the groove of shooting it. Doesn't fit into my pockets very well (semi-tight Levi's)....

I'm sure there is more, but that is all i could think of at the moment.
__________________
Canon EOS M2
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-21-2010   #70
leicashot
Registered User
 
leicashot's Avatar
 
leicashot is offline
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 1,448
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith View Post
????????

I have one of these and I use it for Digital and film and love it!

In fact I just tested mine on two different bodies out of curiosity and it reads a grey card the same as my Sekonic L308s at f2 and f1.4
I believe he was referring to the quality at f/1.4 being less than stellar, especially for Zeiss. It only gets good from f/2.....but then the 50/2 Makro beats it there too, albeit with a much higher price tage and a longer focus throw too.
__________________
WEBSITE

LEICAHUB on Facebook
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-21-2010   #71
Ezzie
E. D. Russell Roberts
 
Ezzie's Avatar
 
Ezzie is offline
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Norway
Posts: 2,718
All digital point and shoots. I wouldn't say disappointed as such, I've never invested much hope in them anyway. Smaller DSLR's in general, lots of small finickity buttons, horrible ergonomics - at least for someone with my brutish hands.

But as long as I can put up with ergonomics and the end results, I am very tolerant when it comes to quirks. And all my camera have them in *****s.
__________________
Eirik

RF: Leica M4-2 | Royal 35-M | Polaroid 110A/600SE hybrid
VF: DIY 4x5 | DIY 6x17 | Voigtländer Vito CL | Foth Derby | Welta Weltix | Smena Symbol | Lomo'Instax
SLR: Canon EF | Pentacon SIX | Pentax SP1000 | Pentax SV
TLR: Rolleiflex 2.8E3 | DUO TLR
CSC: Fuji X-E1
Pinhole: 6x17 Vermeer | ONDU 6x6 | DIY 4x5 | DIY 6x24

My Flickr
Silver Halides - Pictures in B&W
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-21-2010   #72
filmfan
Registered User
 
filmfan's Avatar
 
filmfan is offline
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 1,858
Quote:
Originally Posted by fdigital View Post
Canon EF 50mm f1.4 - a very average lens. Fine over f2, hazy and useless at f1.4
I agree.

Quote:
Originally Posted by fdigital View Post
Every Nikkor I've used (35/2, 28/2.8, 50/1.8, 50/1.4G, 85/1.4, 18-200) - Never met a nikkor I really like. Not sure why - just seem to prefer most other brands lenses.
Thanks for the laugh
__________________
Fuji X100S
Canon New F-1 w/ FD SSC 28mm f2, 35mm f2, 50mm f1.4
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-21-2010   #73
gekopaca
French photographer
 
gekopaca's Avatar
 
gekopaca is offline
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Arles, France
Posts: 734
Sigma DP1. A cold black plastic box (no emotion shooting with), really really slooooooooooow in Raw, and hideous jpeg.

My Voigtlander 28mm f2. Actually a pretty good lens but I never know exactly how to use it with my R-D1. It doesn't stunning me because when I used argentic cameras I never knew how to use 35mm focals. Maybe the "neutrality" of angle steal all my creativity :-(
__________________
Gekopaca
French photographer
http://www.flickr.com/photos/gekopaca/sets/
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-21-2010   #74
jonmanjiro
Moderator
 
jonmanjiro's Avatar
 
jonmanjiro is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Yokohama
Posts: 4,897
Quote:
Originally Posted by fdigital View Post
Every Nikkor I've used (35/2, 28/2.8, 50/1.8, 50/1.4G, 85/1.4, 18-200) - Never met a nikkor I really like. Not sure why - just seem to prefer most other brands lenses.
Agreed! They're all woeful. Save yourselves the stress and send your unwanted and unloved Nikkors to me I will dispose of them properly Heck, I'll even cover postage
__________________
flickr
Instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-21-2010   #75
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
 
Chriscrawfordphoto's Avatar
 
Chriscrawfordphoto is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana
Age: 41
Posts: 7,833
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonmanjiro View Post
Agreed! They're all woeful. Save yourselves the stress and send your unwanted and unloved Nikkors to me I will dispose of them properly Heck, I'll even cover postage
Actually, I agree with the guy who was disappointed by Nikkors. They're sharp, but most of the Nikkors I've used have rather harsh bokeh and their tonal rendering is not that great either. They're good, competent lenses but not great. Olympus OM lenses render much nicer, as do Pentax in the world of SLRs. I have the 24/2.8 AF-D, 28/2.8 AF-D, 35/2 AF-d, 50/1.4 AF, and 85/1.8 AF. All very sharp, none really great as image makers. They work well on digital (which is why I keep them), but have never been happy with them on black & white film. I'd choose an OM or Pentax lens anyday over a Nikkor. Compare them to the ZM lenses or Leica lenses and its no comparison. I have had Nikon system since I was 18 and can count on my hands the number of black and white photos on my website that were shot with them, and I have about 500 photos shot on 35mm film online.
__________________
Christopher Crawford
Fine Art Photography
Fort Wayne, Indiana

Back home again in Indiana

http://www.chriscrawfordphoto.com

My Technical Info pages: Film Developing times, scanning, printing, editing.

Buy My Prints in RFF Classifieds

Support My Work on Patreon
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-21-2010   #76
gavinlg
Registered User
 
gavinlg's Avatar
 
gavinlg is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Wellington NZ
Posts: 4,936
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chriscrawfordphoto View Post
Actually, I agree with the guy who was disappointed by Nikkors. They're sharp, but most of the Nikkors I've used have rather harsh bokeh and their tonal rendering is not that great either. They're good, competent lenses but not great. Olympus OM lenses render much nicer, as do Pentax in the world of SLRs. I have the 24/2.8 AF-D, 28/2.8 AF-D, 35/2 AF-d, 50/1.4 AF, and 85/1.8 AF. All very sharp, none really great as image makers. They work well on digital (which is why I keep them), but have never been happy with them on black & white film. I'd choose an OM or Pentax lens anyday over a Nikkor. Compare them to the ZM lenses or Leica lenses and its no comparison. I have had Nikon system since I was 18 and can count on my hands the number of black and white photos on my website that were shot with them, and I have about 500 photos shot on 35mm film online.
You could have taken the words out of my mouth right there.... I've used the word 'harsh' to describe them on this forum before too...

One exception though, in fairness to nikon. Current 24-70mm f2.8 is the best normal zoom I've ever used. Better than a lot of good primes.
__________________
NO PRAISE
@gavinlagrange
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-21-2010   #77
btgc
Registered User
 
btgc's Avatar
 
btgc is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,756
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris101 View Post
Bummer.

I've never shot a camera I didn't enjoy. Sure some are more ergonomic than others, and some are built like little tanks while others are barely held together plastic. But they are all fun!
I can agree with this. I'm not disappointed in classic sense of this word, rather I like some cameras less than enough to use them on regular basis.

45/2.8 pancake - slower than very common 50/2 (read - darker VF), tiny controls, focus easily moves unintentionally. Usually costs 10x common 50/2

135mm lenses - who uses them, for what???

FL RF's with AE - destroy whole idea of rangefinder camera. To recover, take any fully manual (or with uncoupled meter) FL RF, even cheap and common-as-dirt Petri 7S has shutter release light years better than GSN or KAS2

Iconic P&S cameras - gold plating horse doesn't makes it an elephant, it's still ordinary horse. There are LOADS of underrated and cheaper cameras doing same job for a fraction of price. And when they fail (as P&S aren't built to withstand daily use for extended periods of time) they usually are very hard or impossible to repair, most of times replacing is cheaper.

Internet - first it helps (choosing camera, reading on basics of photography, etc.) and later it can become reason why one has less time to take pictures
__________________
MyFlickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-21-2010   #78
zuikologist
.........................
 
zuikologist is offline
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: London
Posts: 1,804
Quote:
Originally Posted by lxmike View Post
In your photographic journey, what lens/camera/kit has disapointed you the mots, not lived up to its billing. Two stand out to me, camera wise, I have owned at different times, two Olympus SP and have been very disapointed with them and prefered and still do the 35RC.

Lens wise, well over the last 30 years the lens that stands out as the biggest disapointment would be a lens thats often described as 'rare' on a certain auction site. That lens is the Pentax SMC M 40mm F2.8 pancake, very soft at 2.8 and very fiddley to use. How about you, what has let you down or disapointed you
I've had the opposite experience - the SP and the 40/2.8 are a delight. Even better is the DA AF version of the 40/2.8 which work beautifully on digital and film.
__________________
<a href='http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showgallery.php?cat=500&ppuser=867'>My Gallery</a>
  Reply With Quote

Disappointment is maybe too strong, but...
Old 12-22-2010   #79
Jamie Pillers
Skeptic
 
Jamie Pillers's Avatar
 
Jamie Pillers is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Oakland, California
Posts: 3,811
Disappointment is maybe too strong, but...

I've had a really hard time taking to any of the interchangeable lens 35mm rangefinder cameras. And I've gone through a LOT of them recently... Leica M2, 3, 4, 5, and 6; CV R2, 3, and 4; Canon P and 7; ZI.

I just can't see how any of the engineers that worked on any of these cameras were glasses wearers, like me. All of these cameras create the same problem for me... I can never comfortably see the widest frameline if the viewfinder magnification is .72 or more. This means I always have to live with accessory viewfinders for the 35 or 40mm lenses. And if the magnification is lower, like .58, then the longer lens framelines look really dinky and make me think too much about focusing accuracy.

None of this is what I'd call a HUGE problem, just unnecessarily annoying. I really dislike the idea that I have to live without the widest frameline unless I make accomodations (the accessory finders or 'hunting around' inside the viewfinder window to look for those wide framelines. I'd be interested in finding out how what the percentage of rangefinder camera users wear glasses when using their cameras. I'd guess that the percentage must be quiet low.

Actually, the only Leicas I've been able to feel relaxed with are the screwmount cameras, for the simple reason that since they don't have anything other than the 50mm view available, I just don't bother buying other lenses for them anymore.

So I'm headed back to SLRs and larger format gear. I let some of you non-glasses wearers enjoy my RF gear... watch the classifieds.
__________________
Talk to a stranger today!

Some Fuji gear; Speed Graphic (gathering dust); Polaroid 250 (waiting for an 'art' project)

Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-22-2010   #80
rayfoxlee
Raymondo
 
rayfoxlee is offline
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: West Sussex, England
Age: 72
Posts: 226
Rolleiflex 2.8F - beautifully made, superb condition, but the Planar was not as good as the Xenar on my previous Rolleicord Vb IMO. Mamiya C330 - great lenses, but awkward to use and like having a brick round your neck. Minolta Autocord - had a habit of firing its' cocked shutter without any user intervention.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:50.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.