>>3482817I also owned one and sold it after the price boomed but I think my feelings towards the camera are slightly different.
>It's a huge brick for a compactWell, I mean 35mm compacts are all limited in how small they can be by the thickness of a 35mm cartridge. I don't remember it being ridiculously large compared to other film compacts when I used to own one.
>not pocketable at all and heavy to boot.I could definitely fit it in both jacket and jean pockets though obviously it was more comfortable in the jacket. Heft was never bad though and I always used the wrist strap.
>The ergonomics are poor, shutter release is very easy to press by accident, the lens aperture ring is small and hard to operate unless you have stick figure fingers.I think you are overselling how bad the ergonomics are. Thumb focusing works reasonbaly well and the fact that they fit an aperture ring at all onto this camera is a literal god send. I don't care if it is slightly fiddly. I never accidentally exposed a single frame.
>The lens itself is okay-ish but you won't be able to tell it apart from primes that cost less than a half of this camera.This sort of misses the point of the camera. Obviously a film SLR will deliver better results but this is much more portable than that setup that costs half as much. The lens is renowned for center sharpness wide open and overall sharpness stopped down. I was never really let down sharpness wise in my results.
>I'd say this thing is worth around $200 at most. It was intended to be a rich man's vacation toy, not a workhorse.I would say it is worth $400 for what it does so I still think it is overpriced in today's market but it's still the best possible example of a titanium luxury film point and shoot (beside the T3) which is after all what it was meant to be rather than a workhorse professional camera.
It's a nice camera. Would it be my first choice now? No, if I wanted something stylish but portable I'd get a G1 with the 45.
