The Film Retriever

I really want to like Prakticas. I really do. But it seems that no matter how hard i try, Prakticas don't like me. I'll try to explain that a bit more. But first some history. In 1992 - if my memory serves me right - i decided that it was about time to buy a camera. I went with my brother on a camera shop and i was trying to bargain a Praktica MTL-5. Eventually I couldn't afford it and i went instead for the much cheaper BMS. I learned the basics with that camera and it served me well for 5 years until its shutter started becoming erratic. The quote for repair was as high as the camera cost me so I decided to save some money for some time and buy another one (I bought the EOS 5 finally). A couple of years ago, i took my Zenit 12XP to the local repair shop to change the light seals and while i was waiting, i spotted an MTL-3 (or was it a MTL-5?, not sure) and i asked him if i could take a better look. He handed it to me and while i started winding up the shutter and fi...

Back in 1992, I came across one very popular photography magazine which had a review of the brand new Canon EOS 5. It was the time when I was getting obsessed on what camera I should buy (I ended up buying a Praktica) and the canon was the number one on my dream-camera list. Six years later, my Praktica had suffered a damage beyond repair so I was thinking that it was time to buy a new one. I went into the shop to buy a Nikon F50 and i ended up leaving with a Canon EOS 5 paired with a cheap plastic Sigma 28-80. At that time it cost me one and a half salary to get it but I was thrilled with the prospect of using the eye control focus. It's been twelve years since then and I think that it is about time to write a short and biased review based on my experience working with this camera. So I suppose the main question is : How good is it? It is simply amazing, even after 12 years i am still amazed of what this camera can do. The EOS 5 lived under the shadow of it's own ...

The old lady who sold me this camera said that it was her daughter's and she hadn't used it at all. I believed her as the camera seems to be in mint condition. The wind lever is so smooth to operate, and the body clean and shinny.This was mostly a compulsive buy, i saw it in good condition and the price she was asking was right, so i said "why not". It is a really good camera and i wouldn't hesitate to recommend it as a first time rangefinder. The viewfinder is a bit dark but the focusing patch is quite clear to see and easy to operate. A cloth shutter with speed ranges of 1 sec to 1/500 in a bit unusual arrangement. The lens on this camera is a very nice Industar-61, f/2.8 to f/16, coated and very sharp. It also works on my Leica IIc. A nice feature of the Fed-4 is the lack of light seals. It uses the old good Leica drop in loading ( * Correction 31/8/2010 - Drop in loading??? I have no idea what i was thinking when i was writing it, the whole back is removable i...

I got this camera on a car boot sale for 10 pence. The seller said that it wasn't working and true, i couldn't trip the shutter although (according to the seller) there was a fresh battery in. I removed the top part and below the shutter button laid the problem. Be very careful when you take it off, there is a tiny little metal ball that keeps the clamshell open and it is really easy to lose. There is a metal part in the shape of "H" that was not making adequate contact. Took it off, washed it with vinegar and bent it a bit to make more contact and it was working again. It seems that this is a common problem with all XA series but still it is very easy to repair. The clamshell design is good - really good actually. When you close it it resets the switch on the left that adjust the focus. Very clever. The lens is a Zuiko 35 f/3.5 which is a quite sharp lens but it vignettes. Sometimes too much for my liking. Here are a couple of pictures to show you what i mean. ...

It is big. It is heavy as a brick and handles like one. It is extremely noisy and the viewfinder is... let's say... dark. Why should I ever bother with this camera? Let's take the story from the beginning. When my brother in law moved into his new house, he found this camera in his basement. Obviously the previous owner didn't consider taking it with him. Then my mother in law, who knows that I collect cameras saved it from a certain disposal. That summer i got married so I always considered it a kind of wedding present. The camera came with the standard Helios 44-M4, a biotar copy, which appears to be single coated (I might be wrong). Obviously the Helios is a pretty decent lens, provides nice, old fashioned pictures with low contrast but try to avoid the sunshine because it really strangles to cope with high contrast. It appeared to be working ok so i run a film while on vacations and one when I returned to Edinburgh. From those two films i got the following pictur...

Last summer (2009) the lens on my Canon EOS 5 ceased working so i was thinking of ways to finance a new lens for it. I was passing by a charity shop and there it was in the window , a Yashica T4 for £10. I could sell it on eBay for the ridiculous amount of £100 and buy a new lens for my Canon. I've run a couple of films through it and I can only say that this is a really -really- good camera producing top notch pictures. Is it worth the £100 price tag? I seriously doubt. The main selling point of this camera is of course the Carl Zeiss Tessar T* 35 f/3.5 lens. It has a nice blue coating and it is very sharp and controls flare very well. Here are some pictures of what this lens can do ( pic1 , pic2 , pic3 , pic4 ). Not bad at all. I've read somewhere on the internet that it is even sharper than the Contax T2 sonnar lens. Maybe, although i doubt about it. The lens can vignette a bit but i suppose it is normal with such a small front element. Overall it is a really nice lens ...

I came across this cute little camera in a car boot sale. After a hard bargain, my wife bought it for £4. Matt Denton has a great website where you can find some more info about this camera. I never knew that Ricoh was making rangefinders in the 70's. It just looked so cute and the size was right so for £4 i couldn't go wrong. After i got the results back from the lab, i was blown away from the quality of the pictures this camera can take. The camera offers a fully manual and a speed preferred automation. That is quite convenient if you think that most compact rangefinders of that time offered full automatic (Konica C35) or shutter preferred mode (Yashica). A 1.3v PX675 mercury cell powers the CdS lightmeter which is reasonably accurate. Since the PX675 has been long discontinued, i use a 1.5v SR44 battery which requires to compensate with the ASA dial (expose the 400ASA film as 320ASA) for the difference in voltage. The rangefinder patch is nice and visible. On the...