Five 35mm cameras that changed everything

[paulatukcamera]

First I am going to cheat. Disqualify the obvious!

(There is a precedent - on a radio programme called Desert Island Discs when they say "other than the Bible and the complete works of Shakespeare, what would you take")

Why? Simply because I am certain it will shed a light on quite a few "trendsetting" cameras that never get their just deserts

Ones I think are "over obvious" milestones are:
Leica 1 (First successful 35mm)
Topcon RE (First production SLR with TTL metering)
Minolta 7000 (first in-body AF)

You can argue that because something isn't the first it shouldn't have an elevated position in this listing. I can't agree. The MEC16 had TTL metering & so did various cine cameras before Topcon. Pentax showed a genuine "Spotmatic" prototype before the Topcon RE hit the market. However it was the Topcon ranges runaway success that made all the other manufacturer's re-design their complete model line-up.


So here goes - to avoid being obsessed by a single period, I have tried to choose one "earth shatterer" from each decade

1930s
1. Retina 1 - showed all the other 35mm manufacturers the way forward -with a universal film cassette.

1940s
2. Contax S - showed the way forward for SLR design with a fixed pentaprism

1950s
3. Zunow Reflex - showed Nikon exactly what they had to do to make a truly universal SLR (Pentaprism, Instant Return Mirror, Single dial shutter speed selector and most importantly, fully auto diaphragm) I believe designers from Nikon set up Zunow, so must have gone in the opposite direction when it folded

1960ss
5. Beauty Lightomatic 111 (in the UK) Dixons showed the whole UK market that the Japanese could produce a better camera at half the price of the German equivalent priced at £33 rather than the £50+ of Vitos/Retinas/Silettes that "only" had a f2.8!

1970s
4. Olympus OM1 - changed everybody's idea of what constituted good SLR design.


1980s
5. Minolta XD7 - first multimode

Paul

[kiev4a]

Despite not being a great design, I have to say the Argus "Brick" has to be one of the most significant cameras as it really brought 35mm photography to the masses. Don't have an Argus and can't get excited about them but they were significant.

[Randy]

How about the KODAK Retina Reflex?

[doubs43]

How can the 1930's Kine-Exakta be left out? It was the first successful 35mm SLR.

Walker

[PeterW]

Paul, interesting discussion. Thanks for the idea. I'm sure lots of people will have their own favourite 'landmark' cameras. I'd like to add a few. One was launched in 1912, and three in the late 1920s but the impact of their design was felt for many years:

Kodak's 127 VPK. The first really practical pocketable camera at a price that made it immensely popular. It's layout was copied by many makers right through to the late 1930s, most of them using the 127 size film which it introduced.

Contessa Nettel's Deckrullo. Its single-knob control for focal plane shutter speeds was a significant landmark in shutter design. This lift-turn-and-drop design controlled both the slit width and the blind speed with a single setting. It immediately made older two-control focal plane shutters obsolete and set a principle that was carried on to many 35mm rangefinders and SLRs.

Ikonta. When this appeared in late 1928/early 1929 the self-erecting strut mechanism which held the lens rigidly and accurately in its proper position set a new standard and made sliding rail folding cameras look slow, clumsy and innacurate - which many of them were - and made many makers reconsider their folding rollfilm cameras. It made possible the development of the Super Ikonta, surely the king of folding cameras, because without that accurate lens positioning the rangefinder would have been hopelessly innacurate.

Rolleiflex, also 1928/29. It wasn't the first TLR, but it set a new standard and look for rollfilm TLRs, and next to the Leica must be one of the most imitated cameras in the world, even down to tall box cameras with big viewfinders.

Kine Exkata, 1936. Not just the world's first 35mm SLR, it was precision engineered and made with interchangeable bayonet-lock lenses and a range of accurate mechanical shutter speeds which I don't think any other mechanical camera has equalled. The first stroke of the writing on the wall for 35mm rangefinders?

(Don't want to keep plugging one of my favourite camera designers, but the single-knob focal plane shutter control, the Ikonta plus the Retina and the disposable 35mm film cassette which Paul so rightly lists all came from Stuttgart, from the drawing board of Dr. August Nagel.)

Wayne: I agree with your choice of the Argus Brick, but I wonder if the original Argus A has an equal claim as the camera which introduced low-cost 35mm photography to the US?

I've also got a few ideas about landmark lenses, but I'll leave those for another posting.

PeterW

[paulatukcamera]

Walker - oops - you are quite right. Should be added to the "obvious" exclusions. Right up there with Leica. I did debate a bit about Contax but came to the conclusion that it was not really "trend setting" in any respects Its focusing aspects were novel but not copied. My doubts about its inclusion centred on the mount. However I think Exacta have more claim to being "father" to the bayonet mount in modern cameras.

Won't live that one down!

Ah the Retina Reflex. I have every one. Unfortunately trend setting they are not!

The first was a follow up to the Contaflex and the other three (S, 111 & 1V) did not really advance the game.

In fact the only unique point about them was the fact that they shared the same lens mount with the 111S. That may be unique - unless anyone knows better!

Paul

[PeterW]

Paul wrote:

Ah the Retina Reflex. I have every one. Unfortunately trend setting they are not!

The first was a follow up to the Contaflex and the other three (S, 111 & 1V) did not really advance the game.

I agree there, Paul. I don't think the Contaflex (the slr one, not the pre-war 35mm TLR) advanced camera design at all. If anything it put it back and allowed the Japanese to steal a march on the German industry.

Why Zeiss Ikon in the west chose to make a leaf-shuttered SLR with all its drawbacks is beyond me. The designers there must have known all the basic details of the Contax S because design work on that was started before the war, when they were all colleagues in the same factory. They also had the example of the Kine Exakta as a 'system' camera with a wide choice of lenses and accessories.

The only possible reason I can think of is that the Zeiss Stiftung (which had also moved to the west) at that time controlled both the Compur and Prontor factories as well as Zeiss Ikon. Maybe they felt that moving to a cloth-blind focal plane shutter would hit Compur and Prontor economy.

Why Kodak chose to follow the same route with the Retina Reflex is also a puzzle. Unlike Zeiss Ikon they were not under any pressure - unless, possibly, they feared that if Compur and Prontor went to the wall so would the supply of shutters for some of their top-range cameras.

At any rate, both companies semed to ignore the limitations of a leaf-shuttered SLR. Even if the shutter were placed behind the lens it severely limited the rear projection of the rear lens element and made some lens designs impossible to use. Putting the shutter between the lens elements and changing the focal length by changing the front part was even more limiting (though it did tend to cut out third party lens makers).

As it was, both companies chose to ignore what was happening to SLR design in East Germany and in Japan, and went their own sweet ways in a false sense of blinkered security that German cameras had dominated the market before the way and would do so again.

I think the Contaflex and the Retina Reflex succeeded, for a time, because they were beautifully engineered and built and because they had all the marketing clout of two major camera makers behind them.

Had they chosen the focal plane shutter route the story of the German camera industry might possibly have been different.
"For of all sad words of tongue or pen,
The saddest are these: It might have been".

Interestingly, the name first registered by Zeiss Ikon (east) for the development of the Contax S was Pentax, from PENtaprism conTAX, but they changed their minds and chose Pentacon - PENTAprism CONtax. They sold the rights to the name Pentax to Asahi, with the result that it became famous for a different camera following the same principle.

PeterW

[doubs43]

This is one of the most interesting threads we've had in a long time.

I would like to know what influence the occupying forces of the three Western Powers in the Western sector of Germany had - or didn't have - on the West German camera industry. The camera industry was one of the first to be revitalized after the war to infuse hard cash into the economy and I wouldn't be surprised if the Allies had some say in what products were produced.

Walker

[kiev4a]

Walker. I don't know but I'm guessing there may have been some suggestions from the Allies concerning which factories got up to speed first. Don't know in the case of the Exacta since it was made in the Eastern Zone. Cameras were good for both the Germans and the Japanese because they didn't require massive manufacturing plants like motor vehicles.

[doubs43]

kiev4a said:

Walker. I don't know but I'm guessing there may have been some suggestions from the Allies concerning which factories got up to speed first. Don't know in the case of the Exacta since it was made in the Eastern Zone. Cameras were good for both the Germans and the Japanese because they didn't require massive manufacturing plants like motor vehicles.

I don't think that Leica or Rolleiflex/Cord production was delayed for any appreciable length of time. The factories were largely undamaged so it was a matter of materials and possibly skilled workers presenting the major problems. Zeiss Ikon, OTOH, had a tougher time of it with the move to the Western Zone and the workers, materials and tools they undoubtedly had to leave behind. I'm certain it took a herculean effort to re-establish the company in the West.

With the Russians stripping the Eastern Zone of German machinery and forcing many of the Engineers to relocate in the USSR, I imagine that the difficulties were enormous and delayed production for quite a while. Neither the West nor the East had an easy time of it but I would think that the Eastern Zone had it the worst. Certainly the West eventually thrived while the East Germans were repressed in a lot of ways that negatively impacted the optical/camera industry.

Peter can no doubt shed light on the subject with details that I'm unaware of.

Walker

[herron]

Interesting thread, indeed.

I would imagine the Allied forces in Europe had as much to do with revitalizing the camera industry there as they did in Japan. Japanese manufacturers were encouraged to become major exporters of cameras and lenses, as an incentive to be able to sell the same products in their own countries!

[paulatukcamera]

Walker & Ron,

I have the very books for you both, though I am not certain how to get the contents to you. Perhaps scanning & saving as a pdf may be the answer.

The most readable official report I have ever seen! (Humour even)

German Camera Industry - British Intelligence Objectives Sub Committee - (Two volumes 1946)

"Purpose of Investigation

1.1 The purpose of this investigation was to examine the general structure and manufacturing methods of the German Camera Industry. It was realised that many important firms were situated in the Russian sector and it would not be possible to visit these at the time the team would be in Germany. Nevertheless it was hoped that the firms which could be visited would provide a representative cross section of the methods employed ........."

"The object of the visits was to examine the plant and equipment used in the production of cameras and lenses and to establish whether or not the production facilities available gave the German manufacturers any material advantage over British firms engaged in similar types of work"

The team left England on August 8th returning on August 26th (1945) and the firms visited were Plaubel, Nagel A G (Kodak) A Gauthier Lorch E Leitz Franke & Heidecke Voigtlander.

Conclusions (to whet your appetites)

Nagel - Kodak
"An excellent example of a modern mass production plant run on efficient lines" "adequate optical gauging equipment, a wide range of machine tools supplemented by special purpose machines of their own design and manufacture, were indicative of the best engineering practice"

Leitz
"The main impression one gets is the usual one of thoroughness but in the case of Leitz it is more marked than in any of the other factories visited. This is supplemented by a conviction that these people are masters of their art and from research to sales have a complete grasp of every problem like to arise"

Franke & Heidecke
"Franke considered there were no manufacturing secrets in making precision cameras other than good jigging, special purpose tooling and concentration on a standardised limited range - with, he added, the proviso of 25 years experience!"

Voigtlander
"This factory is a mass production plant, highly organised. It is difficult to believe that the Balance Sheet loss is genuine. The plant itself is almost completely standard and one got the impression that almost any non-specialised camera could be designed, tooled and produced in comparatively short time."

Every aspect of the manufacturing process is described - composition of the aluminium used, who made the lacquer, lens mounting, roughing prisms, wage rates, inspection, sales, financial details - about 200 pages I guess (unnumbered)

Paul

[doubs43]

Paul, your post is exciting to say the least. Thank you for the quotes. The British obviously had considered post-war camera production in Germany long before the end of the conflict.

Those books would be a remarkable insight into the German facilities at war's end and I can't say that any of the conclusions are unexpected.

I wonder if the US and France conducted similar fact-finding expeditions? I'm sure the Eastern Zone was a nightmare as the Russians took just about everything from the factories.

Walker

[GeneW]

To me the five 35mm cameras that changed everything runs along slightly different lines than who was first with an innovation. I see these as the 'big impact' models:

1. Leica I, II, III series. Defined what 35mm was, and why it was exciting.

2. Leica M3. Brought the Leica concept up to date and had enormous acceptance by photojournalists.

3. Nikon F. Photojournalists by and large kissed their Leicas goodbye when the F was introduced. SLR proved more versatile for them.

4. Pentax Spotmatic. This camera struck a chord with mass market users and not a few professionals. Good lenses and considerably less expensive than a Nikon F.

5. Olympus OM-1. As has already been said, the Mitani design changed how we came to think about 35mm SLR bodies and lenses, launching an era of sleek, trim 35mm SLR's.

Of current cameras, the one line I think deserves accolades is the Voigtlander Bessa line of rangefinders made by Cosina. They have put new life back into RF's and introduced innovations during a digital photography age. Such as a model with framelines for 21/24/28/35/50. How cool is that for wide-angle enthusiasts?

Gene