Kiev 60. I didn't expect refinement - it was built like a tank, weighed a ton and smelled of oil and grease. I did think something so heavy and industrial would be tough and rugged and - in it's own way - be reliable. In reality it was fragile, temperamental and riddled with faults. Shutter and film transport, mostly. The first one went back for a film spacing fault. The replacement had a lesser film spacing fault, but the shutter juddered and jammed. I never got a fully working one. The dealer did the honourable thing and refunded my money after about 3 months.
Shame - there was something about them that appealed - including lots of interesting lenses. I got a Pentecon 6 instead, a much better buy :-)
I had high hope for mine also, just felt right for me but, it would only space correctly after a couple of rolls of film went through it and intermittently the aperture would stop down to a egg shaped hole. I had even bought a Jena lens for it but ended up packing it (camera) away and bought a F mount adapter for the Jena.... I did like the gun grease smell of it....
Anything Russian. Geez, why did they even bother??? I've had countless brand new ones break in my hands. And the sound of those cameras! *SpRiNg!!*
I bought two zenit 12xp's within a week for $9 with nice m46 lenses. The first one shutter curtains came off before I got film into it. The 2nd lost the shutter speed dial before I could try a 2nd roll. They made a nice noise landing in the waste bin...The lenses are on ebay now funding a new 645 camera.
First generation auto focus SLRs must have been the biggest anticlimax in photo history.
Depends how you classify 'first generation', are we talking generally (Minolta 7000, Pentax SFX, Nikon 501, Olympus OM707, Canon EOS) or are we talking really early stuff - Pentax ME-F, Nikon F3AF or the non-TTL-AF Ricoh AF lenses?
If the former group, the technology was new and users expectations weren't great - most users would be happy enough with the performance. The press however ignored it until the Nikon F4 arrived - which they then bought in droves.
The really early stuff was ahead of it's time. I have a Pentax ME-F and 35-70/2.8 Kf lens outfit, it has the standard split-image/microprism collar focus aid and the < o > AF indicators in the finder. I found it quite eerie to see the AF drive the focus to a perfect split-image/Microprism collar focus - especially considering that today 'AF calibration' occupies so many forum discussions. Then again, every AF system since then has promised that 'you'll never take an out-of-focus shot ever again' and that it is better than any previous AF system.
What's with the Land Rover bashing? I've used my LR3 as a field geologist and it is outstanding in the field (western Montana), IMO. Reliable, comfortable, durable and sturdy. It is a 5800 lb tank, so of course maintenance is important, but with the weight you get fantastic performance in the mountains, snow, mud, etc.
Don't compare it to an peek squeak little urban runabout: 1991 Acura Integra RS Coupe MT 2560 lbs
A light little Honda simply can't do the same things. Don't even take it off paved roads...
The camera in which you will be most disappointed is the camera for which you have the least realistic expectations.
I'll buy that one!
Everyone kept telling me how great DSLR's were so I finally caved in and bought a brand new Nikon D200. There was nothing wrong with the camera and I later upgraded to a used Nikon D300. It's just my expectations were unrealistic due to what I had read and heard from others.
Digital is a nice companion to film but in no way replaces film for me.