Not sure if I would say that I "hated" it, but the Olympus C7070 was a terrible disappointment. Nicely built, and felt pretty good to shoot with. Unfortunately, the focus lock was so slow, your only hope is that your subject is patiently posing for you. I took it to a friends wedding, and soon discovered trying to cover action with it was just hopeless.
My buddy bought the Canon in the same price range, and the comparison of image quality and performance was so far apart. I have owned Canon ever since.
jmizera wrote:
Not sure if I would say that I "hated" it, but the Olympus C7070 was a terrible disappointment. Nicely built, and felt pretty good to shoot with. Unfortunately, the focus lock was so slow, your only hope is that your subject is patiently posing for you. I took it to a friends wedding, and soon discovered trying to cover action with it was just hopeless.
My buddy bought the Canon in the same price range, and the comparison of image quality and performance was so far apart. I have owned Canon ever since.
Not sure if I would say that I "hated" i... (
show quote)
When the C7070 came out, it was known to have one of the most advanced AF systems at the time. Perhaps something was wrong with yours?
rook2c4 wrote:
When the C7070 came out, it was known to have one of the most advanced AF systems at the time. Perhaps something was wrong with yours?
That indeed was the promise. Even saw a couple of good reviews before I bought. I did actually exchange the camera for a replacement that performed just the same. The return window for the second one passed before I got around to sending it back. My friends Canon Powershot, (forget the model) actually looked and felt a bit cheaper. Significantly outperformed the Olympus. Especially in low light.
Big lesson at the time. Try out the camera. Don't just go by reviews.
I never had a camera I didn't like. My Nikon D40, my first DSLR came close. Cutting my teeth on film, I tried to find the aperture settings on my lens; the first day out everything was BLACK! I shot in automatic mode for about 3 months while I learned where (how) to set the aperture! Still have my D40, still use it regularly, still love it!
Pentax K-x. The inconsistency of the AF was maddening. Gave it to a relative who uses it for video using MF. He likes it.
n3eg wrote:
I can't say that I hate cameras with viewfinders - I just hate viewfinders. A lot of my old Kodaks in my collection have viewfinders - I just never use them. My favorite ones however have no viewfinder.
I'm just really curious - how do you compose your photo(s) WITHOUT either having or using a viewfinder?
GoofyNewfie wrote:
I
loved my Mamiya C330's , except for the MX sync switch that could be moved accidently. All the wedding photos I shot with the 80mm lens at my sister's wedding were black- sync switch went to M. They are still married.
The only camera I disliked using was the
Koni-Omega Rapid 100 or 200 (KE-58) I used briefly at the USAF photo school in Denver. They replaced the
Graflex XL with the Koni for press-type cameras then. On paper I think the specs looked good, but in actual use, I really disliked it (hate is such a strong word). The advance mechanism was pretty loud and it didn't feel very comfortable in my hands. No Polaroid back option either. I thought he Graflex XL was a wonderful camera -when it worked.
I i loved /i my Mamiya C330's , except for the M... (
show quote)
The first camera I bought was Koni-Omega Rapid M, when I was a sophomore in high school. Used it through high school, shooting for the year book, then college, and after college for several weddings. Bought the 180mm lens & an extra 120 magazine. Still have it.
My most disliked / hated camera was a highly recommended Kodak compact/p&s/bridge/super-zoom camera, the model number which escapes me. It made reasonably good captures, but its design fault, IMHO, was that the power source was 2 AA batteries that were grossly inadequate. It 'let me down' once too often & I replaced it with a Nikon CoolTouch P500.
Every camera I've ever owned was supposed to be cutting edge only to to rendered less 6 months later. How could a 4 megab Oyympus digital ever be surpassed since I just had a 1.3 mergep Canon. Now we are at 36.3 megapixel with Canon talking about a 50 megap. Where does it stop? We are now beyond Fugi Velvia resolution. There is a limit to what the eye can see. Concentrating on better HDR and color space is more important
CraigFair wrote:
YOU ARE A JERK!!!!
Well pardon me but what do you think you sound like?
May I remind you, we are in the Main Photography Discussion section. Keep your personality out of it and stay on topic.
Typing in all caps is not polite.
And if you have a personal problem like alcohol or other substance abuse or severe loneliness or perhaps suicidal thoughts, please seek professional help and keep it out of this " Photography Discussion"
You are just a new kid on the block but please learn the section rules so we can all get along and learn something.
Remember, the Attic, it is designed for your type of loud all caps screaming, but you still cannot call people names.
:mrgreen:
psst, do you have a camera you like us to know about?
The one that doesnt work :-D :-D
NormanHarley wrote:
I have been enjoying the 'most beautiful camera' thread here and it got me thinking about my first camera. A total lemon. In the late 60's I had saved up my paper route money and bought a Praktica. The shutter never worked right, everything was overexposed and after a month the camera store gave me a full refund after seeing me in there week after week. One of the employees had taken a liking to me and he told me about a used Nikon F that had come back from Vietnam and was pretty banged up. The prism was broken and a local camera repair man had it in his shop fixing it up and put a beat up FTn head from another abused camera on it. Cosmetically, my F was UGLY! But it worked perfectly and came with a 50mm f/2 lens. I went from a beautiful, shiny new Praktica that never worked right to a travel worn, pieced together old workhorse. I consider that Nikon F as my first real camera, I only got a few properly exposed pictures with that Praktica.
I have been enjoying the 'most beautiful camera' t... (
show quote)
The one in someone else's possession and pointed at me.
--Bob
Havnt had a bad one.
Even my first digital, a 1.2meg BenQ, as primitive as it was took good images.
Prior to that were a colour polaroid and 2 film SLRs, a Zenit and a Nikon FM
all good... The Nikon FM being superlative.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.