what's the sweetest crappy camera you had?

Crappy as in the sense that it wasn't meant to be a good camera
(purchase price or whatever), but turned out to be such a sweet
performer.

Mine was a praktica, it was very inexpensive but i took some of the
best pictures ever (documenting special moments in my life) on it.

 

I had a refurbished Ricoh, about 60% less that the new models.
Gave excellent service, still working after twenty years.

 

Mid-80s I bought a Vivitar fixed-focus 35mm camera that served a similar
purpose, made thousands of for-the-record records, very well-exposed and
sharp enough for 3x5s to pass around and stick in the albums. It was
still working perfectly when I loaned it out for the 'teenth time and it
went away, just a year ago. I have forgotten the model designation, but
it cost less than $20 1980 money, and I called it the Anvil.

Now, how about the sourest? The sheep in wolf's clothing. Some kind of
Ricoh monstrosity, auto everything from the early 90s. It had this
flimsy aluminum lens cover that opened-or was supposed to-when you
turned on the camera. With essentially just a breath of pressure it was
warped and rendered the camera useless (they kept it only a week while
the repair was made). Plus which, it took an *expensive* proprietary
battery that didn't last long enough to justify its price, AND if the
battery ran out in the middle of a roll of film, insertion of a new
power unit caused the camera to rewind the film into the cartridge,
never to be recovered before development. Is Ricoh still in business?

 

When the Japanese were just getting recognition in the camera market I
bought one of the first [2.25" x 2.25"] twin lens reflex cameras
imported into England. It was a Rollei clone called the Echoflex. At the
time I was working in a laboratory that had a big photographic section
and several Rollei's that were considered to be unbeatable in an
industrial environment. My new acquisition was put through its [optical]
paces and proved to be as good as, if not better than the results
returned by a typical Rollei. There were some disadvantages though, it
had a manually cocked shutter with no interlocking to prevent double
exposures!
DD

 

My 1960s Minolta SRT-101 35mm SLR with the big glass (still got it, still
use it!)

 

Olympus Stylus Epic - less than $100, but takes very sharp photos with
good colour and exposure. Not a crap camera, but definitely cheap.

Peter
Everything about Vancouver, Canada
http://www.YourVancouver.com
Touchup, an image viewing applet (also shows EXIF)
http://members.shaw.ca/jonespm2/software.htm

 

gosh - ages ago

remember those little cameras with little lenses and film cartridges that
slotted in the back?

great for capturing moments though

 

A little Fuji 1400, don't know why but I take better pics with that camera
than my digital Nikon or Canon 35mm. Still use my Leicas and 4x5. But for
every day pics the Fuji 1400 seems to always find a good pic.

Tom

 

I still have it and it takes better pictures than my current Kobian 3.1
camera...

It's a 1.3 Oregon Scientific Dshot III camera. $30-$60 at Wally World. Now
discontinued.
Even other camera owners have commented on the quality of the pictures.

 

Steve too seems to like it
http://www.steves-digicams.com/fuji1400_pg2.html#conclusion

 

In news:

Mine was a Yashicamat 124 (?), c. 1967; that large 2.25" negative hid a
multitude of sins.

It replaced another piece of junk, a Tamron 35mm rangefinder which died a
horrible death when it preceded me down a flight of stairs into a NY
subway station when the bottom of the leather case fell out because the
threads had rotted away.

I never again carried any camera in its case.

 

I have happy memories of my Praktica too. Mind you, I was on my third one
before the store managed to find me one which actually worked. I didn't
mind too much because it was a more recent model than the one I had
originally paid for.

I am currently blissfully happy with my 2.1Mp digital. I bought one of the
last Oly C2100UZs in the South of England before supplies finally ran out.

Many people scoff and call 2.1Mp "crappy" by modern standards but you can
keep your 6/8/10 whatever Mp. I've got my 10x, stabilised, optical zoom
which I wouldn't swap for 100 Mp.

Keith

 

Those prakticas are sweet cams, aren't they?

 

I've got a 1954 Fed. It's a copy of a Leica II. I love it.

 

what's the sweetest crappy camera you had?

No question.....Olympus XA!!!
It went all over the world with me. Got dropped, stepped on, etc. Fit easily
in a pocket, and took pictures that looked great even at poster size. With
practice you could change the ISO setting to override the automatic meter.
Metering of sunsets was SPECTACULAR!!!!

I still have the carcass....couldn't bear to part with it...

--Bigfoot

 

(Simon Smith) wrote in

Just wondering, do you have a favorite lens that you use
with this camera and can you suggest any to avoid ?

tia

 

(BigFoot14W) wrote in

Hands down, you're right. That little lens renders the sky
and the puffy convectives that float by here in the high
desert like none other. Mine hasn't broken yet. I'm dreading
the day it does.

Bob

 

I actually answered this question a few weeks ago, but lemme do it again.

I had a $50 Vivitar, plastic with three speeds and bulb and maybe four
aperture settings. Nothing automatic, but it had a built-in light meter.

The slides were just as good as those taken by a Konica that cost seven
times as much. I used it on trips for 18 years before it finally died.

I'm waiting for Vivitar to market a digicam at the same price and quality.

 

I have the standard 50mm f3.5 collapsible lens which came with the
camera. I was also recently given a 50mm Zorki f2 - but haven't tried
it yet. I haven't got any recommendations (though I'm certain that
others will).

 

I had a Leica IIIF and put a 25mm Nikkor f4 on it, would fit in a jacket
pocket. Did a lot of street photography with that. The lens adds about 1/4 of
an inch to the thickness of the camera. Canon also makes a 25mm screw mount,
it is more common than the Nikkor, about the same size.

Tom