Vote for the 2014 worst camera of the year award

I will be offline next week - a perfect time to post the 2014 worst camera of the year award (see the last year's award). Here are the contestants in no particular order and the poll:

→ Hasselblad Lunar limited edition camera ($10,000).

→ Another Hassy entry: the “Elite” Hasselblad HV camera ($11,995.00)

→ JK Imaging lens camera (Sony QX10/QX100 copycat).

→ Vivitar IU680 interchangeable lens camera module for smart phones (another Sony copycat).

Pentax K-S1 camera grey
→ Pentax K-S1 camera - the one with the fancy LEDs on the grip ($599).

Ricoh WG-M1 "adventure" camera ($174).

Brikk 24k pure gold Nikon Df “Lux” camera ($41,395).

Sigma Quattro DP2 camera
Sigma dp2 Quattro camera ($999).

Leica M Edition 60 camera without LCD screen - the first Leica limited edition that is still not sold out ($18,500).

King Jim camera equipped mouse - I just had to mention this one as well in order to have the "official number" of 10 cameras.

Here is the poll - please vote and share:

This entry was posted in Hasselblad, JK Imaging, Kodak, Leica, Pentax, Ricoh, Sigma, Vivitar and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Global

    Omg… Hasselblad, lol. That first one is quite a statement.

    And that statement is: “I AM IRON MAN” — hahahahaha….

  • windrincar

    I have no idea what to choose when the choices are so tempting in every way you can imagine…

  • Prognathous

    Most of these are *great* cameras which are capable of taking amazing pictures and have a very good set of features and even handling / user interface. I don’t get this poll.

    • Justtakethepicture

      I think most people know what the Lunar is. It’s a NEX-7 that costs £10k. You really think it’s a great camera?

      • Prognathous

        Judged as a camera, the NEX-7 is excellent, yes. The Lunar is still an excellent camera, but with very very poor value for money. For most people a Pentax 645z would offer terrible value for money, even if it’s a very capable and enjoyable to use camera.

        • Justtakethepicture

          Most people would factor in value for money when judging, especially when you can buy the exact same abilities in a camera a 10th of the price. Please, show me the camera that has the abilities of the 645z at a 10th of the price?

          I guess you were just spoiling for an argument.

          • Prognathous

            If that’s the case, then most Nikon and Canon cameras are sub-par, because they never provide the best value for money (you pay a premium for the label compared to practically all the second-tier brands). In practice, a camera can be a great camera even if priced poorly. I guess we’ll agree to disagree on this one.

          • Justtakethepicture

            Your comparison is a poor one. It’s terms of value for money, you can’t equate Nikon or Canon with what Hasselblad charge for a $1000 camera.

            I guess the guy who put it in the list disagrees with you too.

  • Paco Ignacio

    Can’t we just give the first place to all of them?

  • aurele

    i don’t got why you put the KS-1 in this list. It has the shiny led but besiides that, it’s a decent camera sold at a decent price (500$).
    The Quattro is ugly but take goood pictures. The price is a tad high but you pay the foveon.
    The Ricoh is just quite a copy of the Sony action cam in fact.

    However the Hassy one, the Leica, are another league : Very very expensive and nor any better than cheaper version !

    • Kunzite

      Well, the K-S1 has 5 LEDs on the grip instead of one, and that’s somehow bad, very bad. So bad nobody would care how it leaves the other small DSLR on the market i.e. EOS SL1 in the dust, spec-wise.

      29 people (so far) would rather spend $12,000 on a Sony, than have 5 LEDs on grip. It’s that bad! 😉

      P.S. The Ricoh is an outsourced product made by some Chinese company, but not a Sony copy.

      • Zos Xavius

        Its too bad because the K-S1 is a fairly solid camera. With the K-S2 it makes a lot less sense now, but I digress.

        • SimenO1

          The K-S1 makes a lot of sense at 336 USD. Its one of the most compact DSLRs on the market with lots of qualities D3200, and Canon 100D don’t have. Like the viewfinder rivaling Canon 7D and Nikon D7200.

          Although i would like to see a kit with K-S1 and the new 18-50mm f/4-5,6 collapsible lens and compact hood.

    • SimenO1

      The K-S1 price has fallen steeply to 336,2 USD in Norway (2695 NOK), including both lens and tax. At this price its the best bargain around. Even et 599 USD its competitive. Its beyond reason that its on this list.

      The Ricoh WG-M1 wins tests over Gopro Hero 4 those few places they are compared. Who would in their right mind put it in this list?

      The same with Sigma DP2 quattro. Wierd looking, but a fantastic tool for photographers caring about images, not how the camera looks.

      Is this list a catwalk for cameras?

  • Tough competition this year, and many worthy winners.

  • Bo Dez

    I agree with all of this, except maybe for the Leica. Jury is still out on that one.

    The very ironically named Brikk is surely a joke though?

    Hasselblad surely should win the overall award though. Diabolical.

    • DrunkenRant

      Please explain the DP2 deserving to be on this list. DP2 does what it does, very, very well. The KS may be bad taste but is solid for its price. ugly bad.

      • fjfjjj

        The ergonomics of the DP Quattro cameras are mind bogglingly bad. The camera deserves a nomination for that. But the high quality of the output means it will never win this contest anyhow.

        • plums666

          you’re pretty, wish you were my sister so i can always watch you.

          • fjfjjj

            Maybe you should just watch me all the time through binoculars, and make a bizarre shrine to me in your bathroom.

          • plums666

            love the idea, thanks for the tips! xoxo

  • Spy Black

    Tough to choose between the Hassys or the Sigma.

  • Anonymous

    Please, I don’t think that copycats are necessarily bad, if you consider the Vivitar and Kodak to be QX-series copycats, why are you making an exception to the Olympus AIR?

    • Cinekpol

      Whoever made this poll likes Olympus more than the other brands, obviously.

      • Anonymous

        That, and he thinks he can probably get away with it, considering Kodak and Vivitar are much smaller brands than Olympus, Sony, Nikon, or Canon.

    • Cinekpol

      Whoever made this poll likes Olympus more than the other brands, obviously.

  • James

    Gotta go with the Vivitar IU680 with the JK Imaging lens as a close second. As ugly and expensive as some of the other contestants are, I’d at least use them if they were free.

  • MS

    No 750D, why???

  • Licheus

    So you’ve already dictated the 10 Worst Cameras of 2014 for us. I suppose we could have voted on THAT first?

  • There’s a few distinct types of “bad” on offer here: bad as in “flat out crazy”, bad as in “outrageously tasteless and overpriced”, bad as in “just plain dumb engineering decision”, and bad as in “uninspired attempt at following a trend”. You guess which is which. 🙂 My point is, there can be no clear winner.

    Oh, and by the way, I kinda like that “action camera” from Ricoh. At least it’s the cheapest of the lot, so might be an interesting idea just for kicks.

  • Nawksi

    Came to vote for the Hasselblad Lunar.

    Voted for the Pentax KS-1. LOL, that thing is a dog.

    • Daedbird

      Please explain your definition of what dog means, ‘cuz I am not sure you are using that word right

      • Nawksi

        It’s an expression that means it’s ugly.

        • SimenO1

          You should try buying a camera for its qualities as a photographic tool next time, not for its looks.

          • captaindash

            Why can’t it be both? Most bodies look the same. “But Canon has a slightly slanted shutter release, and Nikon has a tiny red triangle”. Shaddup. They all look the same. Imagine if car makers literally only cared about specs and not about looks?

          • Nawksi

            Mine look good and can take decent photos.

            But hey, if you truly enjoy your quality of life while living with those false dichotomies you keep telling yourself, then good for you. I’ll just continue to “have it all”, as they say. 😉

    • captaindash

      Anything besides black, black, black, and black works for me. People make jokes about how those were the colour choices for the Model T, but somehow anything but black in a camera is a joke?

      I paint all my grips (not bodies because of warranties) because I can’t handle any more black. Kudos to Pentax for at least trying something different. I wish the types of bodies I shoot with came in pretty colours. Too bad the Pentax FF body is just gonna be boring black. Photographers are generally poorly dressed, and use boring, bland cookie cutter looking equipment. That’s odd since they are all about aesthetics, but only within the frame.

  • Louis-Félix Grondin

    I think the Limited Edition Lunar deserves it. Making a limited edition of this thing that already sells in limited numbers and managing to make the ugly “uglyer” deserves a prize.

  • ThreeRing

    I have to go with Hasselblad for Least Value Added, Highest Expectation of Reward.

  • ThreeRing

    The sad thing about Sigma is that if they’d build the Foveon in full 36mm x 24mm or even APS-H size, I’d have no choice but to grab one for landscapes. I can keep my Nikon for evening and dusk, but that Foveon does a lovely thing with color and detail at low sensitivities, and I would want one (with an interchangeable lens or a very wide rectilinear)

  • peevee

    Most of those cameras (with the exception of the mouse – but even that is pretty original, probably even the BEST in its category of 1 🙂 ) are not even close to the worst CAMERAS. Many of them are very bad VALUES, but still very good cameras, at least in thei categories, useful for something, including the Hassy Lunar (NEX-7) and HV (a99). Voting for them just shows extreme envy.
    Speaking about really bad, totally useless cameras from 2014, which nobody should ever chose over much better competitors, here is the list: Ricoh WG-30, Casio EX-TR50, Panasonic GM5, Pentax XG-1, Nikon 1 S2, Nikon S810c, Samsung NX mini, Sony WX350, Sony W800, Canon SX700, Canon D30, Canon ELPH 135/140/150, Canon S200, Canon WX220, Nikon S32, Nikon P530, S9700, Ricoh WG-20, Sony W830/W810, Samsung WB350F/50F/35F, Nikon L830 etc.

    • ThreeRing

      It is not envy. If you like the Honda Accord, and I paint one hundred of them bright purple and gold plate their rims, then call it a Velos Sedanet Ultra instead of a Honda Accord, are you ENVIOUS of a person who pays 150,000 dollars for one?

      • peevee

        If you vote for it to be the worst car of the year, you probably ARE envious of a person who is able to spend 150k for it. Because there are always worse cars, like Civics etc.

        • Pat Mann

          The Accord has ballooned into a wasteful monster over the years. The Civic has grown into what the Accord used to be, a comfortable, economical, dependable basic transportation car.

  • The blad is just a joke, utter rip off.

  • mikeswitz

    I think a better criteria “Which camera would I not use even if it were free”

  • Pat Mann

    Truly a banner year for this category.

  • Back to top