PN&T 1 — Film Cameras

I was never a full–time professional photographer nor trained as one. Instead, I have always had regular employment in fields unrelated to photography, which reliably paid the bills and kept my mind sharp.

Yet I have also done dozens of professional shoots since the early 1980s, either as individual commissions or work for clients as varied as Bausch + Lomb, Spike Wireless, Sydney Morning Herald, Warner Bros Theatrical, Hewlett Packard, Lion Nathan Brewers, University of Wollongong, GM Holden Australia, The Australian War Memorial, Brett Whiteley Stuidos and The Australian National Maritime Museum.

In 2024–5, I wrote a couple of personal monographs about photoshoots I did from 1980–91, to accompany high resolution scans of the original films. Although the articles mainly dealt with the photos and people involved, the more I wrote, the more intrigued I became about the technical aspects and techniques. In particular, I became fascinated by how much photography has (and hasn’t) changed since the 1980s. Clearly it was time to write a longer article.

What follows was originally intended for the “Notes” section of my The Boomer Legacy project, but once it grew beyond 15K–words, I realised it better belonged here.

All the gear I write about was paid for by myself. No loaners for favourable reviews. No grants, awards, scholarships, bursaries, or handouts from distributors/ departments/ partners/ passers–by or multi–millionaire racehorse owning Fathers in Law.

90% of the following is unashamedly about photographic equipment. Gear–head stuff. Hardware. Where the metal meets the meat. No bearing witness nor sweeping tapestry of lingering unregeneratively in Plato’s cave. No clickbait SHOCKING SECRETS & LIES EXPOSED!. Absolutely no Artspeak. Nor do I indulge in photographer clichés of lauding my gear while disparaging everyone else’s. Indeed some of my most used cameras I only tolerate until I can upgrade to something better. I even poke fun at some of my gear because… why not?

Consider the following a guided tour through the mostly 2nd hand equipment I have used over the last 45 years. Sometimes I explore tangents to address broader issues, or relate stories, or give obscure advice, or even dwell on the kind of technical minutiae which would make a nerd’s head spin. It’s all part of the fun and, what the hell, it’s my website and I’ll do as I please 🙂

Nearly all the cameras in this section, which I used as a student in the 1980s, are fully mechanical and manual exposure. I learned from experience you cannot trust auto–exposure with film as you only discover too late if it didn’t work. You can of course shoot a sequence of ±EV backup exposures, but it’s an extravagant waste of film, especially for 120 medium format where it costs $s per frame.

Due to the “analogue resurgence” since the late 2010s, a lot of the following cameras have become popular again, especially among younger photographers. Hence the detailed discussion below.

Section Quick Links

• Minolta SRT–101
• Nikon F2 Photomic
• Polaroid OneStep 600
• Nikon F
• Nikon F4S
• Rollei 35S
• Rolleiflex T (M2)
• Mamiya RB67 Pro–S
• Fujifilm GW670 III Professional

Minolta SRT–101   (1980)   ↑

I purchased my first 35mm film camera in 1980 when I was sixteen: a 2nd hand Minolta SRT–101 with a Rokkor 50mm ƒ1.7 lens. Fully manual and mechanical, the “101” still gets a lot of love online — see this 2024 Reddit thread — but I never felt it. There was nothing particularly wrong with it, but found the results uninspiring.

I mainly got it to bask in the halo effect from all the print ads in early 1970s National Geographic Magazines. It was an okay albeit boxy camera, the CLC metering was reasonably accurate (for reflected readings) and the 50/1.7 lens was fine. But I always felt I could do better, so sold it within a year. Almost 20 years later I was surprised to see a “101” pop up again as Rose Byrne’s retro camera in the Aussie crime film Two Hands (!?)

Nikon F2   (1981–6)   ↑

Spent my final year at high school in 1981 working two after–school jobs to save for my first proper camera: a 1972 silver chrome Nikon F2 Photomic. Got it 2nd hand from a retired accountant for $AUD 490 — which in today’s money works out to $2420.

It had a DP–1 Photomic viewfinder, which I often swapped with a DW-1 waist level finder for candid shots, and was a significant improvement over the SRT-101. But six months later I accidentally dropped it onto concrete and broke the body shell around the lens mount. Despair, grief and irreparable damage. Took it to a few camera repairers but they all shook their heads. One of them laughed. I used epoxy glue to mend it as best I could, but a few years later sold it for spare parts 😢

In the interim it was used without too much bother. Only the body shell adjoining the lensmount had fractured, everything else — shutter, mirror mechanism, viewfinder, lens changing, camera back, film transport etc. — all worked fine. The epoxied mount was as strong as ever, although the lens axis was now ≈ 0.25° out from perpendicular to the film plane. This resulted in the RHS frame edge being subtly close–focused at wider apertures. Worked around it by photographing things at an angle so the object RHS was closer the camera. For portraiture it even proved to be a benefit because it acted like a lens tilt which brought the lower part of the sitter into better focus.

Almost twenty years later I bought a 1979 black chrome Nikon F2A with DP–11 finder. By then I was using a Leica R6.2 and deep in Leica Land, so feelings were more muted. Indeed I was unsentimental enough to have the F2A butchered modified by a NYC camera technician so it could work with Leica R lenses — see my Leica FAQ.

Nikon F2 merits? Fully mechanical & battery independent operation, aside from the 3V CR1/3N battery to power the lightmeter in the photomic finder. A large selection of interchangeable finder options and focus screens. It was motordrive ready — not that I ever used one. It featured a Ti–foil shutter rated for at least 100K actuations, when this was unheard of. Most importantly, it shouted Pro Cred! when as a seventeen–year–old this meant a lot.

I had a Nikon AR-1 soft release and Nikon AS-1 flash coupler. I also had an accessory DL–1 Photomic Illuminator which screwed into the DP–1 eyepiece to light the finder top frosted panel — very convenient for night work, in my case rock photography in murkily lit pubs. The DP–12 finder later addressed this by having a triple LED viewfinder display.

• 

  Rock photography with the Nikon F2 and 50mm ƒ1.4 — Nick Cave & the Birthday Party in 1982

Issues? The shutter + mirror–return were staccato loud, which made candid photography awkward. X–ync was only 1/80th, limiting flash use outdoors. I also found many Nikkor lenses were to my critical eyes “meh”. Most fatally, despite changing my shooting technique to adapt to my patched camera’s misaligned lens, at wider apertures images were subtly out of focus on the frame RHS. Eventually it became so annoying I decided the camera had to go 😕

Polaroid OneStep 600   (1983–7)

For a few years in the 1980s I had a Polaroid OneStep 600 Land Camera to compliment my film gear. I couldn’t afford the premium SX–70 (which ceased production in 1981 anyway), but the boxy OneStep 600 was embarrassingly primitive:

• Low resolution with blurry frame edges
• Fixed focus 1.2m → ∞
• Crude exposure control via a sliding tab beneath the lens
• 10× shots per film pack (modern packs now only do 8)
• 77×79mm (W×H) i–Type prints, effective 640 ISO
• Each print required ≈ 3 minutes to fully process, longer at colder temperatures. Development was never consistent, resulting in blotches & streaks, especially in areas with plain colour
• In low light you needed to use a disposable flash–bar with 10× bulbs
• Despite its folding front to protect the lens & viewfinder, the camera remained quite bulky and a nuisance to carry around

And so on… Yet it had one overwhelming advantage — it produced instant colour prints! Which made it indispensable for quickie shots and exactly the thing mobile phones are now used for.

Decades later instant photography seems to be having a moment. At a high school charity function in Sep 2025, I noticed a lot of teenage girls (dressed in pyjamas) were using Fujifilm Instax Mini 12 cameras, which to my experienced eyes yielded dreadful images half the size of traditional Polaroids. Even so the kids shrugged off my remarks and were delighted with their prints. Egy gyereknek minden új.

This was intriguing and warranted further research:

• Instax cameras aren’t covered by the NSW school mobile phone ban
• It’s another part of the broader “analogue resurgence”, with a growing desire for physical artefacts which can be handed around and shared
• Polaroid’s patents expired a while ago
• Per print, Fuji Instax is cheaper than Polaroid (≈ ½ price)
• “Instax Mini 12” cameras cost ≈ $AUD 120 from K–Mart/ Target etc.
• Leica make a high end (Fuji re-branded) Sofort 2 for $AUD 699
• FFS you can even get Instax adapters for Hasselblad V for $US 800 (!)

Nikon F   (1986–92)

After breaking the Nikon F2 (and my teenage heart), I swore I would never spend a fortune on a camera again. (Hah!) So I got a pair of “beater” 1960s Nikon Fs for ≈ $AUD 100, with scratched bodies and dented non–metering finders. When combined with a hand–held meter they did the job surprisingly well and were used for years as “B Cams”, even accompanying me as who cares if they get stolen cameras to Eastern Europe in 1991.

Solid, bulletproof and dependable, but after the F2… antiquated and dull. Having to remove the camera back to change films was exceptionally irritating (something it inherited from the 1957 Nikon SP). By 1992 I was heavily into 120–medium format and had also acquired a shiny new Nikon F4S, so sold the Fs for roughly what I paid.

• 

  In Moscow with the Nikon F in 1991, at a protest near the Gorky Park entrance

Bulletproof eh? What about Mark Meyer’s Leicaflex SL2 Mot, which survived an 8 km fall from a fighter jet after a mid–air collision?…

Nikon F4S   (1992–3)

A big clunky beast with built–in motorised film advance. In 1992 I lasted five months as a solicitor, so could afford to replace the vintage Nikon Fs with a brand new top–of–the–line Nikon F4S (1791), with a MB–21 6× AA battery pack and AF NIKKOR 50mm F/1.8 lens. Similar to the earlier F2 or F3 models, it supported a variety of interchangeable finders, so I got a DW-20 waist level finder for candid work (had to import it from Singapore). I notice you can get 3D printed WLF alternatives now.

The F4S was the only camera I used in my twenties which was fully electronic. It had multi–mode exposure automation with P_H, P, S & A exposure modes, although I mostly used M with a trusty hand–held lightmeter.

Reviewers swooned over the new “foolproof” matrix exposure metering, but it only took five minutes to realise it had the same limitations as any other reflected meter. Moreover the DP–20 finders turned out to be susceptible to LCD “bleeding”, where over time both LCD viewfinder displays develop irreparable inkblot artefacts.

I never experienced the LCD bleeding as only kept the F4S for 18 months. The camera was just too hefty/ loud/ conspicuous for street and candid work. I also found the early single–point screw–drive AF suboptimal (ie. crap), while the 5fps motordrive was ridiculous overkill. Finally, the smooth rubber–coated body surface didn’t inspire confidence it wouldn’t one day slip from my hands…

At the time I didn’t have a photo trolley, so carrying the lump around my neck was also the type of character building I didn’t need. Meanwhile the Canon EOS–1, with its rear-mounted magical game–changing “Quick Control Dial”, swept the photography world. Thankfully I was immune to its endlessly hyped charms.

Alas its fixed 40mm ƒ2.8 lens, despite being a Zeiss Sonnar, was mediocre and susceptible to flaring. To make matters worse there was no rangefinder, so focus could only be done by eyeballing the distance and then setting the value on the lens 🤦🏻 Grew so frustrated I got a Watameter accessory rangefinder. Unfortunately the 35S has its flash shoe on the camera base, so you had to use it upside down, then still transfer the distance to the lens by hand. To add to its extensive list of quirks (LHS film winder, disassemble the camera to change film etc.), it used a PX–625 1.35V Hg battery, which was so environmentally toxic it was soon banned.

The main point of the 35S was its compact body dimensions — but how do you hold something that small steadily? I persevered for 18 months then gave up. Ditched it for a Leica M and never looked back.

In 2024 the Rollei 35AF was released. Like its namesake it uses 35mm film, although the “Rollei” name and logo are now a licensed brand with the camera made by Hong Kong based MiNT Camera. The new 35AF is closely copies the original 35S styling and layout, although with a larger body. It has AE support, a QLED display and LIDAR based AF. Looks interesting, although reports of unreliability are a concern. Likewise the heavy–press shutter would interfere with getting sharp images from an already “far too small to hold steadily” body. Opinions may vary.

Rolleiflex T   (1981–5)   ↑

We skip back to 1981 and I’m still doing two after–school jobs to save for a Nikon F2, so didn’t have a lot of money to spare. Yet I absolutely had to get a medium format white–face Rolleiflex 3.5F Schneider Xenotar twin lens reflex (TLR). Problem was they rarely appeared on the 2nd hand market and were prohibitively expensive.

After a few months of fruitless searching, I lowered my expectations and settled for an inexpensive Rolleiflex T (M2). Not at all what I wanted it, but at least it was a Rollei.

Features:

• Twin lens reflex (TLR), with a pair of vertical lenses with the upper one for viewing and the bottom one to expose film
• 1962 Model 2
• Carl Zeiss Oberkochen Tessar 75mm ƒ3.5 taking lens
• Bay I filters and lens accessories
• A dozen 6×6 (56×56mm) exposures per 120 rollfilm
• Grid–pattern matte–glass focus screen without focus aids
• Built–in “ν” self timer
• Built–in bubble glass Selenium lightmeter
• No auto–load film mechanism

It supported double length 220 rollfilm, but I only ever used 12–frame 120. The 75mm Tessar lens could be excellent at ƒ8–16, although you got swirly frame–edge bokeh at ƒ3.5–4. The minimum focus was 1m, which sounds reasonable but wasn’t close enough for head & shoulder portraits. Rolleinar 1 or 2 close–up accessory lenses could help, but they couldn’t address TLR parallax. Even so lots of people still use them to obtain good quality portraits, so opinions vary.

• 

  The Rolleiflex T 75mm Tessar could yield amazing results. In the 46MP scan of this 1983 image, you can count the fine hairs on the rioter’s wrist…

The built–in Rollei selenium lightmeter was a primitive match–the–needle thing, with its display coaxially located within the LHS focus knob. It didn’t require a battery, but worked poorly in dim light. I eventually got a vintage hand–held CdS Gossen Lunasix 3 lightmeter with “bright” and “dark” range settings, and despite its age surprisingly accurate for both incident and reflected readings. Unfortunately it couldn’t meter flash, and similar to the Rollei 35S used a pair of toxic PX–625 Hg batteries.

What drove me to despair though was discovering the Rollie T top (viewing) and bottom (taking) lenses were slightly out of focus alignment. It had negligible effect at medium to infinity distances, but ≤ 3m it would front–focus by ≈12cm. At wide apertures like ƒ4 this could be a nuisance, to say the least. For example I would focus on a sitter’s neckline, but on film her face would be OOF while the hands in her lap were sharp. Had to work around it by learning to focus behind a subject’s face, which always ended up being hope–filled guesswork [ Note I ].

I had a tough time as a teenage photographer: Nikon F2 = angle to the right to adjust focus. Rollei T = focus behind the subject when up close. Sheesh 😡

Aside from close–focus issues, I was otherwise happy with the Rollei T. The shutter was quiet, the lens sharp(ish) and it was relatively compact with the WLF folded down, making it easy to tote around in a small bag.

Being unable to change lenses could be frustrating, but compared to the close–focus issue it wasn’t a big deal. As the prime–lens users say, zoom with your feet.

I also wasn’t worried about the missing geared wheels for aperture and shutter speed adjustment, as on the more expensive Rolleiflex E/ F models. Some people worry needlessly about the Rollei T’s cheaper plastic belt mechanism, yet it is robust enough to survive 60+ years. Another deal–breaker could be the cost–cutting omission of Rollei’s auto–load film mechanism. I considered it one less thing to fail and was it really that difficult to align film indexing arrows with dots printed onto the rail beside the film gate?…

Mamiya RB67 Pro–S   (1985–93)   ↑

Despite the Rollei T’s advantages and its role in capturing many of my early favourite images, I eventually grew tired of the unchangeable lens and having to guesstimate close focus, so sold it mid 1985 [ Note II ].

Its replacement was a 1970s Mamiya RB67 Pro–S with Mamiya-SEKOR C 127mm F/3.8 lens, purchased 2nd hand from Fletchers Fotographics in Sydney.

RB67 Main features:

• Medium format SLR with interchangeable lenses ✓
• Fully mechanical battery free operation ✓
• Built–in bellows for close–up (minimum focus ≈20cm) ✓
• Ten 6×7 exposures per 120 roll, via interchangeable film backs. I only had one, but occasionally rented more when required ✗
• The film back could be rotated between landscape or portrait without having to reorient the camera (“RB” = “Rotating Back”) ✓
• There was no built–in lightmeter with the default WLF ✗
• NO/ NONE/ ZIP Parallax! ✓

A major irritant was the multi–step process required for each shot:

1. Crank the RHS lever to arm the lens–shutter & lower the viewing mirror
2. Advance the rear film magazine lever
3. Release the shutter (… and behold the loud KER–THWUNCK sound as the mirror flopped up and the lens–shutter activated)

The later RZ67 had a combined mirror & film advance mechanism, along with an option to use a motorised winder. Which was nice, but the camera was so battery dependant I (and many others) refused to go anywhere near it.

A further nuisance was the hunched over the camera waist–level viewfinder, since I was too cheap to buy a prism or chimney viewfinder. The RB67 was also so bulky it required a hefty tripod — I tried shooting hand–held a few times, but it wasn’t easy. Grip holders were available, but they didn’t help with the heft and bulk.

Film–fogging could also be a serious issue when working outdoors. RB67 film magazine dark–slide light traps were notoriously prone to light leaks, mainly due to foam &/or velvet seal deterioration. Discovered (much) later it was an easy fix — replace the seals — but didn’t know this back then as there was no public internet to search. Hacked a solution by affixing a gaffer tape flap over the slot — crude but effective.

RB67 Likes:

• All mechanical operation. During an era when Hg or Ag₂O batteries were notoriously unreliable (no Li–Ion back then), you never had to worry about a failed battery terminating your shoot (I’m looking at you rented Canon A1)
• 6×7 aspect ratio. Square format is excellent for various things (there’s a good reason why it was the default on Instagram), but you have to crop to fit rectangular formats. The RB’s 6×7 is close to both 10×8 and 5×7 print sizes, so no need to cut as much
• Rotating back. You could shoot portrait format, then twist the back and shoot landscape without reorienting the camera. An alternative solution was 6×6 square format but… we’re back to cropping if you want rectangular results
• Robust & Reliable. Despite shooting more than 100 rolls I never had one seize on me. Wish I could say the same about my Hasselblads 😡
• All metal construction. Tough as, and you felt you could make CCCP field adjustments with just a bottle of vodka and a hammer. Completely unlike the more sophisticated and battery dependant RZ67, which used a delicate mix of plastic and metal parts to reduce the weight and increase the fragility
• Beefy “Pro” looks. A superficial thing for sure, but clients and sitters tend to notice. A friend once complained about a dubious modelling gig due partly to the photographer using cheap looking gear [ Note III ]. When she posed for me a few years later, she was very impressed when she fist saw the hulking RB67 mounted on a sturdy tripod, Jesus! Now that’s what I call a bloody camera!

RB67 Dislikes:

• Don’t even consider working without a tripod + cable release. This thing is the size of a large shoebox and the weight of small car. I wrestled with it hand–held a couple of times, and decades later still wake in the middle of the night in a cold sweat. That said, the RB67 isn’t as laughably enormous as the Fuji GX680 (thank god)
• Rapid it is not. See above for the Concorde–like preflight sequence to take a photo
• Film magazine light leaks. Mentioned this above and yes I know Hasselblad can also do it, but having replaced the seals in my A12 magazines, they never leak, even if you leave them in direct sunlight for an hour (did this to test). My RB67 outdoors was so bad it used to ruin frame after frame until I covered the magazine dark slide slot with gaffer tape
• Unremarkable lenses. Controversial opinion I know, but once you use a Carl Zeiss PLANAR T* 100mm F/3.5 CFi there is no going back. Granted Mamiya K/L lenses were generally okay and could be quite sharp at ƒ11–16. They could also produce nice bokeh without distracting (Hasselblad) pentagonal highlights. They do suffer from veiling–glare though, and are noticeably less sharp at distances greater than 4m, especially the Mamiya-SEKOR C 127mm F/3.8

Fujifilm GW670 III   (1993–97)   ↑

I took a four–year hiatus from photography in 1993–7. Sold the Nikon F4S and RB67 and replaced them with a “Texas Leica” Fuji Fujifilm GW670III Professional for intermittent personal use.

It was a large 120 rollfilm 6×7 fixed–lens rangefinder. It worked fine, yet I found it annoying as it was a fixed lens camera and the body was plastic–everything, which offended my all–metal brick sensibilities. The shutter was loud and made a ringing “twang” after exposure; The rangefinder patch was ridiculously small; The EBC Fujinon 90/3.5 lens was so–so and closest focus was only 1m — ruling out portraiture and close–ups. Again. Used the camera on and off for a few years then sold it without regret. I avoided the more popular Mamiya 6 as I had heard and read uncomplimentary things about its unreliability and lens quality.

Oddly the GW670III still garners a lot of love online, so 2nd hand prices are surprisingly high. Mine had < 250 exposures and the 6×7 version was rare since everyone else bought the 6×9 “GW690III”. Maybe I should have held onto it 🤔

Started using 120 film cameras in the early 1980s, and still use them more than forty years later. Their main advantage is a much larger film image which produces better tonality with minimal grain. The larger image also enlarges/ scans much better, ultimately producing better quality prints. The following section deals with the medium format cameras I currently use.

Section Quick Links

• Mamiya C330 Profressional
• Hasselblad 501CM
• Hasselblad 500EL/M

Mamiya C330 Profressional (TLR)   ↑

Svelte it ain’t…

Overview

If you haven’t guessed already, I was an outrageous camera snob in the 1980s. If it wasn’t a Nikon or Rolleiflex then I didn’t want to know. Leicas were for silver spoon poseurs wealthy enthusiasts and Hasselblads were priced so far into the Oort Cloud that my meagre undergrad budget couldn’t cope [ Note IX ].

As I note above, after a few years of struggling I replaced the Rolleiflex T with a 2nd hand Mamiya RB67 Pro S in 1985.

At the time I briefly considered getting a Mamiya “Pro” C330 or C220 TLR, but wrote them off as bloated Rolleiflex wannabes. At any rate, buying another TLR was out of the question after all the focus and parallax issues I had with the Rollei T. Yashica Mat TLRs were likewise off the table as I considered them the antithesis of everything I wanted in a camera.

In retrospect I should have been less dogmatic and purchased a refurbished C330. Used prices were reasonable and 1970s models were easy to obtain, as there were a healthy stock of trade–ins in just about every Sydney camera store. A C330 would have avoided most of my Rollei T issues and, despite the bloat, was still ⅔ the size of a hulking RB67.

Yes I know the ƒ2.8 or ƒ3.5 E/F Rolleis are famously compact, have fantastically sharp lenses and their focus action is sensually smooth. In particular the 1970s 3.5F Xenotar models have near Hasselblad image quality, which Mamiya C lenses cannot match. They also come with enough bragging rights to satisfy even the most insufferable gear–head. (Who, me?) But, but… I had been burned by the Rollei T experience so TLRs were out.

Decades later in Sept 2024 I finally overcame my TLR aversion and bought a 1971 Mamiya C330 Professional from Sydney Super 8 at King Street Newtown.

It was purely an impulse buy. Originally saw a Rolleiflex 2.8E with lens separation & fungus, then noticed an excellent condition C330 for a surprisingly low price and quickly bought it. By comparison a similar age/ condition Rolleiflex 2.8F could have cost 5× more.

Mamiya C330 overview

The final two C330 production models were the C330 Professional ƒ followed by the C330 Professional S. Mine is the model which preceded them, the C330 Professional. Apparently the later ƒ and S variants used more plastic components to lighten the load, so maybe it’s a good thing I got the first model. Admittedly the later models have a better designed RHS shutter lock and LHS friction lever for more precise focus. The S also had a redesigned single action waist level viewfinder and (it was claimed) brighter focus screen.

The much cheaper & simpler C220 is a whopping 500g lighter, but you have to manually cock the shutter in addition to winding the film, just like the R–Bloody–67. The C330 has internal gears for this, hence the extra weight, although you can still manually cock the lens to reduce stress/ wear on the camera winding mechanism.

C330 Features

Rolleiflexes were made as self–contained snapshot cameras with fantastic lenses, while Mamiya TLRs were system cameras designed for studio portraiture and weddings. Their main selling points were their lower prices, interchangeable lenses, a selection of focus screens and built–in extension bellows which allow significantly closer focus:

• 35cm for the 80mm F/2.8
• 65cm for the 105mm F/3.5

(Cf. 100cm for the Rollei T Tessar 75mm)

This lets you get really close with the C330, almost 1:1.5 with the 80mm. No issues anymore with head & shoulder shots — indeed you can fill the entire frame with just your hand! Things are even better with the 105mm or 135mm, where you can do tight head–shots but still remain far enough to not spook the sitter.

TLR = parallax issues. The C330 has a viewfinder LHS needle to act as a frame–top guide plus exposure adjustment — nix for the Rollei. For critical framing of static subjects, the “paramdender” tripod accessory can help.

TLR = no mirror–slap. Which guarantees quiet vibration–free operation. The Hasselblad provides a separate pre–release switch to raise the mirror.

TLR = a quiet shutter. A surprisingly crisp little click, as opposed to the bombastic KER–THUNK of the Hasselblad or RB67.

TLR = laterally reversed viewfinder images, just like the good ol' days where left is right and vice versa. To keep with the 1980s vibe, I do my metering with a similar vintage Gossen Luna Pro F (see below).

120 film = 12× frames per $AUD 25 roll, so make ‘em count!

Unfortunately the C330 doesn’t feel as “solid” as my other mechanical cameras, probably due to the large interior cavity for the lens and black concertina focus bellows. People who whine about its weight really need to take the “Hasselpanzer” out for a spin…

Aside from obvious things like close–up parallax, an inherent weakness of all TLRs is controlling lens flare. With an SLR you view through the taking lens and directly observe what things will look like on film. With a TLR you have no idea because you are looking through a separate viewing lens, which sometimes sees things differently to the taking lens beneath it. Flare in the upper lens may mean none in the lower, or vice versa. It can be infuriating, especially when shooting into the light. And yes Rangefinder cameras suffer the same problem.

Another issue particular to the C330 is ruining slow speed shots by unintentionally jerking the shutter release during exposure. At s/speeds less than 1/125th you need a cable release (or a pistol grip) for peace of mind. Despite having lots of longer cables from my Hasselblad days, got a vintage Kaiser 25cm release off eBay.

An additional benefit of using a cable release (or grip) is to keep your fat fingers away from the spring–loaded shutter–arming lever, which is too easy to impede during use and will yield a blank frame.

Then there is the dim viewfinder/ focus screen, mainly because you look through an upper ƒ2.8 lens designed for daylight or well–lit studio work [ Note IV ].

At least you can at least easily disassemble C330 focus screens to clean out ever–present dust bunnies. Nix for the Rolleiflex T.

Yet aside from the bulk & keeping your fingers away from the arming lever & and murky focus screen, the C330 on a cross–body strap works well as a walk around camera. When out and about I often get stopped by younger photographers: How old is your camera?!… Why does it have two lenses?… What kind of film does it use?!…

Accessorising The C330

• Replacement focus screen “C330 Brightscreen MPD #6613 screen”. Not overwhelmingly brighter than the original, but its 45° split–image microprism is a must–have for accurate focus
• Replaced the camera body leatherette using a pre-cut kit bought off eBay. The 1970s original was curling up at the edges, so the new skin makes the camera look and feel brand new
• Bakelite Mamiya M645 Series Pistol Hand Grip with built–in wrist strap. It needs to be used with a screw–in Abrahamsson (mini) “softie” to bridge the gap between pistol grip trigger and body “chin” release, but luckily there is still a bit of slack, preventing the shutter from becoming a hair–trigger. The adjustable wrist strap is also useful for a secure hold
• I originally tried a Hasselblad pistol grip (45047). It worked, but tended to twist on the base no matter how much the ⅜” screw was tightened. Not an issue with the original Bakelite Mamiya grip, which avoids twisting due to a pair of pins which register with sockets on the camera base
• A custom 3D printed prism viewfinder adapter enables use of Hasselblad viewfinders. It was printed from a Mamiya C-series adapter for Kiev88/Salyut prism viewfinders STL 3D–file
• For a while I used a Hasselblad NC–2 prism, but it made the camera too top–heavy. I now use a Hasselblad Magnifying Hood (42013) Type I “Chimney finder” (see image below) which, being mostly empty space, is much lighter yet still makes focusing and framing easy

The camera with pistol grip and chimney finder is admittedly bulky and conspicuous, at which point why not just use the 501CM or 500EL/M?… For starters there is no mirror slap, the shutter is significantly quieter, it has built–in extension bellows and — most importantly for this Furiously Independent Thinker — the oddball factor is off scale 🙃

Lenses

Currently use the following:

1. Mamiya Sekor 80mm F/2.8 (black, silver dot)
2. Mamiya Sekor DS 105mm F/3.5 (blue dot)
3. Mamiya Sekor 135mm F/4.5 (blue dot)

Mamiya TLR Lenses don’t score well on the online table of MF lens resolutions. Apparently the Sekor 80mm matches the Rolleiflex T 75mm Tessar, yet both the Hasselblad 80mm Planar or Rolleiflex 3.5 Xenotar blow them away. You can clearly see the difference under a loupe → not a disaster, but clearly a downgrade in contrast and sharpness. Most vintage MF lenses were never designed to be hyper sharp anyway, as 120 film requires significantly smaller enlargement ratios.

80mm F/2.8

My silver dot 80mm F/2.8 came with the camera. Image quality? Mush at ƒ2.8–4 but okay at ƒ5.6–11. It is also sharper at 2–4m than infinity and contrast is muted due to antiquated lens coatings.

There are (unsubstantiated) claims the later 1980s Professional S lenses with purple anti–reflection coatings could match Rolleiflex & Hasselblad in optical performance. Opinions vigorously vary. FWIW all my Mamiya TLR lenses have the original yellow tinted coatings.

Contrast can be improved slightly for B&W film by using yellow or orange filters → I always use a 46mm Hoya Y(K2) (HMC) filter, which requires only a +1 stop correction

135mm F/4.5

In April 2025 I bought an excellent condition blue dot 135mm F/4.5 medium telephoto lens. Discovered upon delivery it was a bit of a weirdo since the taking lens aperture and leaf shutter blades were exposed at the rear. I thought I had been scammed, but discovered it was a “feature” of the lens design (!)

A bigger quirk is focus, as it’s not a true “telephoto” but rather a long–focus design. Which means at infinity the flange distance has to be 135mm from the film plane, requiring you to rack the bellows out to almost half-way. Closer focus requires even more racking, like 20cm from the camera front plate (sheesh). Thankfully if you remember to set the lens focal length on the LHS body dial after mounting (!), the amount of parallax and exposure compensation remains the same as for the 80mm.

The good news though is the 135mm is sharp! Magnificent for full–face shots or closeup details.

105mm F/3.5

A month later I got a blue dot DS 105mm F/3.5 lens, which has replaced the 80mm F/2.8 for everyday use.

I find the slightly longer focal length (58mm equivalent on 35mm film) more convenient for everyday scenes, along with tighter crops for close–ups.

Similar to the 135mm it is a “long focus” design, so the bellows also have to be slightly extended to achieve infinity focus.

Discovered upon receipt it had sticky shutter blades, requiring a trip to Camera Service Centre to be CLA'd. Luckily the original seller refunded the service fee from the purchase price 😀

Mamiya TLR Lenses Generally

Changing lenses on the TLR is convoluted but works:

1. Cock the shutter
2. Turn the LHS dial to lower the camera baffle slide (to protect the film)
3. Disengage the front lens wire clamp release
4. Mount the replacement lens & reengage the wire clamp
5. Re–raise the camera baffle
6. Set the appropriate focal length on the LHS dial to ensure the viewfinder parallax/ exposure compensation indicator is correctly configured

Sounds complicated because it is. Yet with practice it’s relatively straightforward, although it can be too easy to fumble a step — in which case I recommend staying with a lens while shooting and only changing between rolls.

Because 2nd hand replacement lenses have become so inexpensive (≈ $AUD 300–400), if a shutter dies you can simply buy another lens. Furthermore the lenses are uncomplicated and relatively simple to have serviced, provided your tech can source parts.

Mamiya TLR lenses all use 46mm filters which are much easier to source and cheaper than Rollei Bay I/ II. Searched my spares trunk and found B+W 46mm rubber hoods for the 80mm & 105mm which don’t impinge on the upper viewing lens (original Mamiya metal hoods go for $120 on eBay).

In May 2025 one of my neighbours 3D printed deep dual lens rear caps for the TLR lenses. He did a fantastic job and the new caps are better than the 1970s originals!

All lenses have leaf shutters which enable flash sync at any speed. A surprise is how stiff the shutter springs can be, which you can really feel when you manually cock the shutter. Which may explain why so many used C330s have stripped/ jammed body gears from ham–fisted cranking.

Hasselblad 501CM & 500EL/M   ↑

Famous brand this, despite stupid attempts by management to trash their own legacy by releasing “Lunar” and “Stellar” re–skinned digital Sonys in 2012.

I won’t dwell on the entire 6×6 V System as there are plenty of others who have done so already — eg. Beyond The Aperture or Photoethnography. What I will do is note ‘Blad quirks and observations from my twenty years of use.

Overview

I bought my first V System Hasselblad from KEH.com in 2004: a chrome 501CM with A12 Type IV back and Planar T* CF 2.8/80 lens. At the time many pro photographers were ditching their ‘Blad gear to go autofocus and digital, so used prices dipped to “affordable” levels. I notice prices have since rebounded to almost triple what I paid 😠

Although not as bloated as the RB67, I still found the 501CM + lenses bulky and a pain to carry around. Tried various camera backpacks, but by far the best solution was a homespun camera trolley where a photo backpack was mounted onto a wheeled frame. Over decades have experimented with various configurations before arriving at my current two, referred to as Mir and Sputnik:

They both allow walking around for hours without breaking your back. They can hold a camera with mounted lens, along with secondary lenses and various film/ accessories etc. The smaller Sputnik is the default for everyday use as it can hold a lot of gear yet still be easily wheeled around in confined spaces. The far bulkier Mir, with its reinforced wheels, is for when I need to go in heavy and bring the proverbial kitchen sink.

503CW vs. 501CM

These were the last manual 6×6 V System cameras before Hasselblad transitioned to the autofocus 6×4.5 H System in 2013. Both 503CW & 501CM feature a “gliding mirror” mechanism to reduce vignetting for longer lenses or close focus, along with “palpas” internal anti–reflection coatings. The 503CW was the premium model with support for OTF/ TTL flash and a detachable motor winder. The 501CM was released a year later (1997) as a “more affordable” version without TTL or winder support.

As I didn’t need the additional features, I got the cheaper 501CM, followed later by a 500EL/M for motorised work. At the time on the 2nd hand market the 501CM was almost half the price of a 503CW.

In Dec 2025 I got to play with a 1970s 500C/M (10022). It surprisingly felt much more solid than the 501CM, presumably due to tighter tolerances and greater use of brass internal mechanics. The focus screen was a different story however — I couldn’t believe how dim and murky it was. Give me a “budget” 501CM any day with its Acute Matte D screen and GMS mirror!

According to its serial number, my 501CM is a 2003 model, meaning it was practically new when I got it in Oct 2004. In twenty years it hasn’t let me down, aside from the occasional Hasselblad mis–cocked lens jam. For most of my early Boomer Legacy work it was used on a tripod, but from 2012 onwards I prefer to use it with a modified pistol grip.

The only snafu is the internal “palpas” anti–reflection coating, which has begun to fade and crack. Cannot be helped alas and luckily mine isn’t too bad. Interestingly the pre–palpas black coating inside the 500C/M still looked pristine after 50 years…

Hasselblad 500EL/M

In recent years V Series “C” cameras have become extremely popular, although the same cannot be said of their motorised “EL” cousins. The 500EL/M (10219) I got in Oct 2025 was unbelievably cheap, as it came without magazine nor finder and the focus screen supplied was in very poor condition. Cf. a “mint” condition 503CW which can easily cost 10× more.

Motorised ‘Blads remain unpopular for a couple of reasons:

• They are loud and bulky. They were designed for studio use, so the emphasis was on rapid operation and not “stealthiness”. Noise/ mass were not issues when the camera was intended to spend its working life on a studio camera stand
• Earlier models (500EL, 500EL/M) used a pair of archaic 6V NiCad batteries (“DEAC 5/500 DKZ”) which could only be recharged in–camera. These (heavy, expensive, temperamental, low capacity) cells were the bane of ELs, forcing Hasselblad to eventually ditch them for standard 5× AA batteries, even offering a conversion service for existing 500EL/M owners (as a penance?)

So why bother?…

• Nail, say hello to Hammer. These things are tanks. They were designed to be simple and reliable and clatter along for 100Ks frames. It’s no coincidence I refer to mine as The Hasselpanzer
• Cheap. Collectors are so preoccupied with “NEAR MINT” 503CWs that ELs tend to get overlooked
• They are always armed and ready. Take the picture, KLACK WEEEERRRT and the lens is automatically re–cocked with the mirror returned
• It is the only camera I have ever used which requires a 1.5A slow-blow fuse. There are even three sockets for spares, so they must have been popping them all the time [ Note V ]. Fingers ✗’ed I haven’t blown one yet

I got a vintage 500EL/M instead of a more modern EL (eg. 555EL/D) precisely because it was the older 2× NiCad model. They are very unpopular (ie. cheap), yet can now be powered by internal battery adapters which work better than the originals. I use a pair of “Hasselconverters” with USB rechargeable 8.3V 5400mWh cells, as lighter and more sustainable alternatives to 9V Alkaline/ Lithium [ Note VI ].

I specifically chose a 1983 model as it was late in the production run (1971–84) and, like my F3/T, was what I would have bought at the time if I had the $10Ks required 😕

The 500EL/M has a DIN socket for external power to recharge NiCads or for very long cable releases. Haven’t played with it yet. It is located on the motor RHS beneath the A12 magazine frame counter. I covered it with a cap made from Sugru silicone putty, which can be peeled off if required. Also used Sugru to replace the four cracked/ missing plastic feet on the camera base.

The 500EL/M lacks the “Gliding Mirror System” of later models, a non–issue in my case as I only use 2.8/80 or 3.5/100 Planars on this body. If anything the simpler mechanics makes the camera (a tiny bit) quieter and (perhaps) more reliable.

Most of the time the EL/M is used with a “46221” pistol grip (see below), although I have purchased a “46063” FK–30 cable release for tripod/ monopod use. I notice you can also get after–market replacement shutter buttons which are threaded for mechanical cable use. Haven’t bothered as I already have the FK–30.

Hasselblad Flexbody

From 2012—2024 I used a Hasselblad Flexbody (3072109) whenever I needed tilt, shift and/ or close–up:

• Tilt: approx. ±28°
• Shift: approx. ±14°
• Bellows extension: 22mm

I mainly got it for architectural/ landscape work, where the Scheimpflug principle increases DOF and provides perspective control. Emphatically never used it for “miniature faking”.

It worked as advertised and certainly looked impressive on a tripod. Yet it was incredibly fiddly, similar to a view camera only much more constrained. For starters the lens was mounted with its centre line at 3 o’clock. You could only use standard V Series lenses, which restricted you to only modest amounts of tilt/ shift — unlike the Hasselblad Arcbody with its dedicated Rodenstock lenses. To arm the lens shutter, you rotated a small dial on the camera, then closed the lens prior to exposure by a half–pressing a cable release. You swapped the focusing–back & 90° viewer for an A12 film magazine, then advanced the film via the magazine crank (which on other ‘Blads you never touched mid roll). BTW don’t forget to remove the magazine dark–slide as there is no locking mechanism to remind you…

Which is all very pure & heroic, but in practice was a curse–inducing PITA. Shot my last roll with it in 2015 and kept it in a trunk until 2024, when I sold it without regret. Should I ever feel the urge to Scheimpflug again, I’ll get a Linhof Master Technica and be done with it. Or maybe even a digital tilt–shift lens.

Zeiss T* lenses

Come for the elegant V Series modular camera design, stay for the Zeiss T* lenses.

Mine are “CFi” versions, with reputedly the best ergonomics, lens coatings, internal anti–relfection blacking and reliable shutters. I had each CLA’d a couple of years after purchase, so they shouldn’t need servicing for another twenty years. (Some claim you need to do it every year. Yeah, right…)

Each lens has a B60/B70→67mm filter adapter ring to enable use of 67mm filters, lens caps and rubber lens hoods. Since I mostly use ‘blads now for B&W work, I have B+W 040 Orange filters to darken skies and B+W 022 yellow filters to lighten skin tones + less dramatic skies. I have multiples of each so can pre–mount them to avoid fiddling on location. FWIW I don’t use UV filters on the Zeiss.

A lot of people wax lyrical about how “perfect” Hasselblad lenses are. Not me. While admittedly they are very good, they have nowhere near the resolving power nor colour fidelity of certain Leica R or M optics (see below) or Rodenstock large format or Alpa lenses. Disagree? Mount any V Series lens onto a high MP digital camera and standby for disillusionment. Nevertheless they are significantly better than Mamiya–Sekor C lenses on the RB67 Pro S or Mamiya C330 TLR.

Like most retro medium format systems, V Series lenses have built–in leaf shutters (B—1/500th), which enable flash sync at any s/speed. This was one of their biggest selling points prior to the advent of high speed vertical–travel shutters in the 1990s [ Note VII ].

I have all the relevant Hasselblad boxy lens hoods, along with a Proshade 6093T (40739) matt–box, but prefer B+W 67mm rubber lens hoods on the 3.5/100 and 2.8/80 lenses. They do an excellent job shading/ protecting the front element plus fold back onto the barrel for compact storage.

Loading Film

This is far more fiddly than it needs to be. You have to learn to slow down, or else pre–load your films in spare A12s prior to use. Small wonder the Rolleiflex film “autoload” mechanisms were so beloved by harried 1960s lenshounds.

The basics of film loading are covered in detail by M.Thomas (2012) Photo: How to Load a Hasselblad Film Back on YouTube.

A few extra tips:

• Do it in a shady place. 120 film is made up of a paired layer of film + paper backing, so it doesn’t require a lot of direct sunlight to leak around the paper edges to fog the film
• You don’t have to detach the entire film magazine from the camera body, just pop out the film insert
• Make sure the Hasselblad body is always cocked. This takes getting used to when coming from other systems, but with ‘Blads you do everything with the lens armed. If you don’t then you will lose the first frame when winding on. Up–vote for the 500EL/M which does this automatically after every shot
• The YouTube video shows the importance of aligning the film–backing arrows with the triangular marker on the film holder clip. I always give it an extra ¼ turn to provide additional space between frame 1 and the film leading edge
• Film magazines (at least Type III & IV) stop at “12”, which is annoying as you cannot cheapskate an extra frame onto the end of a roll (a cool feature on the Rolleiflex TLRs)

I currently have three A12 — 6×6 magazines: 2× Type IV (with a rear integrated slide film holder), and a Type III (without). The two IV’s stay on the cameras while the III is used for a “B Roll” when I quickly need to change films. Both III and IV have the most up–to–date film transports, yet their external appearance is sufficiently dissimilar to easily distinguish.

In case you missed it, A12 magazines only shoot 12× frames per roll. At $AUD 25 per roll you better make each frame count. I have never tried a A16 6×4.5 (30082) back as you also need a 90° viewfinder with a 645 focus screen cropping mask. If you decide to go down this route, be careful of inadvertently getting an A16S back, which is actually a 4×4 back for “super slides”, viewable in (some) 1970s slide projectors. “Slide Night” anyone?…

I wouldn’t bother with earlier magazine types, especially the “Magazine C12” (Type I) with its speakeasy peep–hole to align frame #1 — although it is so hilariously antiquated I may get one just for LOLs!

Some people obsess over magazine shell/ insert serial numbers matching. I don’t, but wouldn’t buy a magazine if the insert was > 2 years older than the shell. Use this site to check Hasselblad S/Ns for the manufacture date.

Finally, am thinking of one day maybe getting a (3:2 crop) CFV ii 50C digital back. Surely at my age I don’t need both kidneys…

Prism Viewfinders

My 501CM came with a standard “42315” (chrome) folding waist level finder. It is light and compact, yet I found I was always popping the built–in magnifying lens for accurate focus. The L→R laterally reversed image also got old fast.

A PM–5 (42308) 45° prism solved most of my issues and I still use it today. It also has a “cold shoe” atop the prism for a spirit bubble (see 501CM photo above), or a small flash for weak fill or catchlight.

A few years later I got PME–45 (42297) metered prism as hand–held incident readings could be tricky when using telephoto lenses. The finder has built–in dioptre view–lens correction along with a variety of metering options, including a small diffuser ball for incident readings (!) It uses one CR2 V3 lithium battery which lasts forever. After a while I stopped using it as I found it too ungainly — not heavy since the external housing is mostly polycarbonate. I also became paranoid as eBay prices kept climbing. Reverted to using the PM–5 and now keep the PME–45 in safe storage, should I ever need a deposit for a second car.

When I got the Mamiya C330 in 2024, I decided it needed a compact eye level finder. The original Mamiya options (Poro Finder or Poroflex or Eye–Level Prism Viewfinder) were overpriced, ancient and murky. Since the costly PME–45 was out of the question, I got a Hasselblad NC–2 (52027) 45° prism, mounted via a 3D printed adapter. Worked (very) well, although it did make the C330 top heavy. When I got the finderless Hasselpanzer a year later, I moved the NC–2 over there and had to search again for a replacement C330 finder.

Ended up getting a KEH “bargain” grade Hasselblad Magnifying Hood (42013) Type I “Chimney finder”. It is light and works great, but annoyingly I'm back to viewing things L→R reversed again 😖

Pistol Grips

Initially used the 501CM on a sturdy tripod, which worked fine but was slow and a pain to lug around. Eventually got a much lighter Induro CT214 carbon fibre tripod — but handling remained slow/ bulky/ awkward.

Around the same time I bought a couple of 45° prism finders and started experimenting with using a monopod or else shooting hand held. The monopod worked fine but was still slow and bulky(ish), whereas hand–holding only worked at s/speeds ≥ 1/125th, as otherwise things got increasingly shaky.

I then discovered Pistol Grips, which promised a reasonable compromise. Unfortunately there were none specifically designed for the 501CM (or 503CW), so I used a generic grip as a kind of chest pod and tripped the shutter via a short cable release.

It was clumsy and inelegant but worked. Yet This Would Not Do™. So I modified the trigger on a Kiev pistol grip and now we’re talking:

My 501CM grip is a combination of a modified Pistol Hand Grip Handle for Kiev–88 Salut–S with a Hasselblad Tripod Quick Coupling Release (45004). A little later I tried to similarly modify a Hasselblad “45047” Pistol Grip, but the Kiev–88 version worked much better as the 45047 had a slack trigger spring.

Have used my “frankengrip” for almost fifteen years, and although it would make W.Heath Robinson smile, it is secure and works very well, even down to s/speeds of 1/30th. If I pre–release the mirror then I can get down to ¼ sec. Any slower and I'm back on the tripod again.

For the 500EL/M, Hasselblad made a specific “46221” grip with an elongated trigger finger. Unfortunately it lacks the slide–in convenience of my hacked Kiev grip, as you have to attach it by screwing into the ⅜” socket on the camera base. Consequences.

Miscellaneous Accessories

Bay (60/70) Filter Adapter Rings

Purists will recoil in horror but I have never used Bay–60 or Bay–70 filters. As noted above I use a Tiffen Bay 60 (or Bay 70) to 67mm step–up ring. They are made of aluminium and live permanently on each lens, although can be quickly removed if required. They enable use of easy–to–get 67mm filters, rubber hoods and lens caps. Since I tend to lose caps easily, any center–pinch generic 67mm cap will do. Brand aficionados can spend up big for a Hasselblad H (3053360) 67mm at £UK 18, or a Ziess 67mm for $US 29 (+ shipping for both).

Hasselblad 45° Cable Release Adapter (50776)

These are available on eBay or online retailers. They make using a standard cable release less stressful for the shutter button as they provide free play for the cable to rotate and swing. They also angle the cable go off to the side instead of going forward, which otherwise you then have to bend back (see the Flexbody and 501CM photos above).

Hasselblad “unjamming” tool

These are essential to help re–sync desynchronised lenses or bodies, where one is armed but the other not. One end of the tool is to re–arm lenses, the other for the camera body cam. They are available on eBay for ≈ $US 20.

Focus Screens

Acute Matte D (42215) is the only way to go and came with my 501CM. It has a central split–prism surrounded by a microprism collar, with a large reference–cross to help with verticals. Unfortunately used prices have reached defence procurement levels (≈ $US 800!). Some money–grubbing diсkheads people even swap them out of motorised Hasselblads to sell the “42215” screen on its own for an obscene markup. In my 500EL/M I swapped out the supplied screen with a Maxwell Precision Optics “Hi–Lux” resurfaced reference–cross screen (42165), which is bright enough and works okay. BTW “Acute Matte” screens are distinguishable by the double–dimple on the LHS bottom of the metal frame.

Prism Rubber Eye Cups

Got a nice prism but the rubber eye cup has deteriorated? Despair not, for you can replace it with a brand new Kiev clone for (Hasselblad relative) pennies — see Araxfoto.

Hasselblad Quick Coupling Adapters

These are mounts which attach to a tripod/ monopod head and allow “quick” mounting of the camera by sliding it into the adapter. There are many varieties (eg. 45004, 45128, 45130, 45144), choose whichever you prefer. Many people ignore them and instead use an Arca Plate adapter on the camera base, to then mate with a ubiquitous Arca mount on their tripod head. Boat. Float. Whatever.

Over decades have used a large number of 35mm film cameras. Gravitated away in the early 2000s due to a preference for medium format film, but a decade later I started shooting 135 film again. The following are selection of models I currently use.

Section Quick Links

• Leica R9
• Nikon F3/T
• Leica IIIG
• Leica M6 TTL

Leica R6.2   (1998–2017)   ↑

I originally bought a Leica R6.2 (10073) in 1998 to replace the workaday Nikon F90X I was using for commercial QTVR panoramas. I chose the R6.2 because it was fully manual, didn’t require batteries (except for the lightmeter) and worked with my Leica FISHEYE-ELMARIT-R 16mm f/2.8 lens (11222):

I was happy using the R6.2, but when combined with a Motor Winder R (14208) it became bulky and loud (+ heavy as the winder required 6× AA batteries). Consequently I sold it and moved on to using Leica Ms for most of my work.

During 2017 I bought a few Leica R lenses to use on my Sony Digital mirrorless bodies, then realised I also needed a Leica R body to occasionally shoot film. Initially got a Leica R7 but found it frustrating, so in May 2017 I traded up to a 2002 Leica R9 Anthracite (10090) with an R8 Motor Winder (14209).

Leica R9   ↑

When the Leica R8 was released in 1996, it drew a lot of flak for being too heavy & bloated & trouble–plagued. Due to its unique design, which incorporated the viewfinder pentaprism into an undulating top plate, critics also disparaged it as The Buffalo Leica or The Hunchback of Solms.

Nevertheless the R8 was sufficiently successful to ensure an updated R8.2 R9 version in 2002. The new R9 is 100g lighter, has a top–plate frame–count display and mode–wheel lock, updated internal electronics and is substantially more reliable than the (early) R8 — see Harris, J. (2023) Leica R8 and R9 SLR walkthrough at YouTube.

A note about R9 accessories above:

• The Summilux 50mm (E60) lens has a B+W 55mm rubber lens hood, attached via a Sensei 60–55mm step down ring
• The lens front element is further protected by a B+W “F-Pro” E60 UV filter
• A black silicone rubber ring separates the rubber hood from the (tokenistic) built–in hood, while a paisley blue silicone wrist band covers the lens focus ring to increase “gripiness” plus aid in identification (all my R lenses have different coloured bands)
• The camera base has a R8 motor winder
• Peak Design Strap Anchors in the camera eyelets
• The shutter button has a 12mm chromed brass Leica Soft Release button (14015)
• The flash shoe has a Nikon BS–1 accessory shoe cap

The pair of CR–123 3V lithium cells in the R8 Motorwinder power the camera’s lightmeter and electronics. Without the winder, the R9 body uses two smaller CR2 3V lithium cells. I have no idea how long the CR2s last, as I have always used the larger CR–123s in the winder. One thing is certain though, the pair of CR2s last far longer than the button cells (or single CR1/3N) in the Nikon F3 (presumably why Leica chose them). Unlike the F3 however, the R9 has no mechanical backup shutter setting. Dead batteries = dead camera.

R9 Likes

The R9 is my go–to for shooting 135 film (that’s 35mm film folks), especially for wide angle or telephoto work. It has a number of benefits which make life more enjoyable:

Access to “Hollywood” R lenses

At a time when “CaNikon” was betting everything on autofocus, R lenses remained defiantly manual focus. I personally didn’t care, but a helluva lot of others did, causing sales of Leica Rs to collapse in the early 2000s.

I was lucky in 2017 when I bought my 2nd hand R ROM lenses, as prices were still depressed due to them being perceived as part of a dead system. Again I didn’t care as I intended to use them with adapters on Sony mirrorless cameras. However a few years later videographers discovered R lenses and prices soared back through the roof. Why? Because R lenses have a pre–digital spherical design, where in–focus parts of an image are sharp, yet the remainder is “rounded” and “smooth”, unlike digital–era lenses which are sharp but sometimes “harsh” or “clinical” as well.

Vintage Leica M lenses also exhibit this “smoothness”, but due to their non–telecentric design they don’t play well on most digital cameras, resulting in significant vignetting and frame edge artefacts. R lenses were designed for SLRs with a much deeper flange focal distance (47mm vs. 27.8mm for the Leica M), so edge digital artefacts from non–perpendicular rays are significantly reduced.

The R lens “sharp but smooth” output resembles classic Hollywood Cooke (and other) cine lenses which can cost ten times as much. The long–throw R manual focus mechanism also makes them easy to adapt to focus rigs. All of which hasn’t escaped the attention of professional cinematographers, who snap up R lenses to be modified or even rehoused for movie productions. If people with very deep pockets want something badly enough, then prices must inexorably ↑↑↑

R8 Winder

The R8 winder (14209) carries over from the previous R8 and is IMO essential. The larger CR–123 batteries last forever and having film automatically advance after each frame is a godsend. I wouldn’t get the 4.5fps R8 motor drive (14313) though, as it is enormous and uses an oddball battery pack which can only be recharged using a custom charger. Ditto the add–on Leica Power Pack MW-R8 (14250) for the R8 winder. In case you missed it, without a winder you have to advance film by hand as the R9 lacks a built in motor (unlike say the Nikon F4).

Beefy

Dainty it ain’t. Being a third larger than the pro champ Nikon F3, which was still in production when the R8 was released, people know you mean business when you whip out an R9 👊 Its larger top surface also spreads everything out so its non–protruding controls are easy to access and use, even in gloves.

Film Autoloading

Nikon and Canon had it for years, but it took Leica a while to get the memo. Slap a film cassette into the chamber, pull the leader across the gate and close the back — the winder will do the rest. It makes me smile every time (and try not to think too much about loading a Hasselblad A12 magazine or (shudder) Leica IIIG…).

The film chamber also has DX contacts which, if you prefer, automatically read and set the ISO from barcoded film cassettes. I tend to load my own B&W film from 30m bulk rolls, so I got a dozen reusable 100 ISO DX encoded cassettes off eBay.

Only 36 frames…

… so make ‘em count. Like any film camera really, and a huge detox from the 750383 shots a typical mobile user does every day.

Multi–Pattern lightmeter

In my lightmeters section you will see I am a hand–held incident–reading kinda guy. Although the much hyped Nikon F4 matrix meter didn’t impress, the R9’s multi–pattern meter keeps surprising with how accurate it can be. Usually. Of course things can go awry with light or dark scenes, but otherwise it is (mostly) spot on.

Winder or manual-advance

This is pretty cool. When you need to tone down the Girls On Film clatter, you can disengage the winder by simply pulling out the manual film advance lever and wind on by hand for as long as you like. When done, push the lever back and the motor takes over again. With the R6.2 “Motor Winder R” you had to partially extract the battery housing to get the same functionality. Motorised rewind is also available, leader out or in, but I mostly do it by hand to conserve battery life.

Exposure +/− lever

When shooting in auto–exposure mode, which admittedly I seldom do, the rear +/− lever is handy for quickly adjusting exposure with your left thumb, without removing your eye from the viewfinder.

Modes

“M” (fully manual), “A” (aperture priority auto), “P” (program fully auto), “T” (s/speed priority auto), “F” (for flash) — most of the time I just use “M”. The R9 has a mode lock button to prevent the dial from accidentally shifting, something which bedevils R8 users.

Dedicated “F” mode

F is for Flash (metering). As explained in a 2002 photo.net post, the “F” Mode enables the built-in flash meter. Only. You manually set the X–sync (1/250th) and your estimated lens aperture, then trigger the flash via the DOF lever (not the shutter button). The camera will measure flash exposure then indicate any change in the viewfinder. F Mode works best with manual or auto thyristor controlled flashes. TTL is proprietary of course, so you need Leica OEM flashes or (say) a Metz 44 MZ2 with SCA 3502 adapter. Although F mode works as intended, it will surprise no one when I say you are better off using a hand–held incident flashmeter 🙃

Clear optical finder

Modern digital EVFs can be bright and clear, but Leica SLRs already had it in the 1970s. A range of interchangeable R9 focus screens are also available, including one with a framing rectangle for the 2005 crop–sensor 10MP Digital–Modul–R digital back. I use a standard focus screen with a central split prism surrounded by a microprism collar. Am still waiting for digital cameras to implement something similar.

The R9 viewfinder supports manual dioptre adjustment, as did the R6.2, but the Nikon F3/T DE–4 HP prism doesn’t → you have to buy separate eyepiece correction lenses. Nikon eventually got the memo and implemented built–in dioptre correction from the F4 onwards.

• 

  When shooting film I usually prefer medium format. But the Leica R9 is for when I wish to travel “light”

The R9 (+ winder) is a delight to use. Yet they remain obscure and unpopular due to the “hunchback” thing plus 100% no autofocus, a deal–breaker for many. It doesn’t help that Leica abandoned the R System in March 2009. Saying abandoned isn’t hyperbole, as they petulantly sold off their R spare parts and production equipment, and thereafter refuse to service R cameras and lenses. Luckily there are still a few aging 3rd party technicians who can do basic adjustments and repairs. Which may explain why used R9 prices remain relatively subdued 🤔

Nikon F3/T   ↑

A couple of days before this article went live, I bought a rare(ish) black chrome Nikon F3/T (1694). As noted at “lens–db.com”:

It is very hard to find a mint or near mint F3 black Titanium today.

Yeah well, in Feb 2026 I found one.

The Controversial Battery

The Nikon F3 was given a cool reception when it landed in March 1980. Unlike the legendary F or F2, Nikon’s new NASA endorsed flagship was completely battery dependent. There was a backup speed at ≈1/60th and time exposure “T” was mechanical, but otherwise all functions needed electrical power. It might have been okay if the F3 used high–capacity batteries like (say) a Lithium CR2, but at the time your only option was a pair of dinky 1.5V silver–oxide EPX76 button cells.

Pursed lips. Cranky letters to magazine editors. Droll remarks about the strap eyelets, film–reminder holder and tripod socket still working if the batteries died. Pros throughout the world clutched their beloved mechanical F2s just that little bit closer to their sinking hearts…

A common misconception was the batteries were required for the new stepless shutter. Not so. What they did was power the new exposure timing and camera control circuits. Otherwise the shutter mechanism was still powered by mechanical energy from advancing the film, either by hand or motor, just like earlier mechanical Fs. The new quartz timing circuit replaced the usual gears, springs, actuators and other mechanical devices — hence the lack of buzzing during long exposures. This made the shutter more reliable, precise (eg. ¼ sec is consistently 250ms) and not coincidentally, more robust for extended motordrive sequences.

If only Nikon and magazine reviewers had spelled this out. They did mention the shutter was electromagnetically controlled, but many misread this to mean electrically powered. Lost in translation I guess. After a couple of years people realised “Batterygate” was overblown and a Lithium 3V CR1/3N could easily last a year of daily use before replacement. Which in retrospect shouldn’t be surprising, given the F3’s frugal electronic design. However please note:

Regardless of whether the camera is switched off or not, the Nikon F3 always discharges a small amount of electricity because it incorporates a quartz oscillator circuit.

None of this concerned press photographers and photojournalists, whose MD–4 motordrives had electrical connections to power the camera. Since the drive used 8× AA cells, battery anxiety was a non issue, especially after 1992 with the release of lithium AAs. The F3/ MD–4 combination is somewhat bulky though…

Nikon eventually solved the battery issue by releasing the Nikon FM3a in 2001, which had an innovative hybrid shutter capable of both battery (AE exposure) and mechanical (manual exposure) timing control. Opinion remains divided over whether the FM3a shutter is as robust as that in the F3.

“T” for Titanium

Nikon began experimenting with titanium alloy body covers in the 1970s, even releasing a few rare F2 titanium models. Because they had also been making titanium foil shutter curtains since 1959, they had extensive knowledge in working with the tricky material. So it wasn’t surprising when F3/T titanium body versions were released in 1982 — not rare collector editions either, but standard production models anyone could buy. The initial run had a bare metal “champagne” colour finish, but Pros kept grumbling about it being too luxe and conspicuous, so a couple of years later production shifted to low–sheen black versions, as per the photo above.

Unlike Leica M6 (and M7 etc.) “titanium” models, the Nikon F3/T uses solid titanium alloy body covers and not merely a Titanium nitride coating applied to standard zinc or brass body parts. Yet there is surprisingly little weight difference between the standard and titanium F3 versions, implying extra Ti is used to reinforce the body panels. Which makes the F3/T a tough little bastard and helps explain why mine still looks great, despite being 37–years–old when I got it.

According to the production code located beneath the camera back hinge, mine was made in July 1989.

Using the F3/T also feels a little unusual in that titanium has a much lower thermal conductivity than brass or zinc. So it takes a while for the body to warm up and it doesn’t retain heat for long when you put it away. It’s not a huge difference but it is noticeable.

Party like it’s 1985

I won’t churn through all the F3 specs and features as there are plenty of others who have done so already. It eventually became Nikon’s most successful professional system camera, with a 21–year production run from 1980–2001 and more than 1M cameras sold.

Similar to my “Hasselpanzer” in 2025, I mainly got it because it would have been the 35mm camera I bought in the mid 1980s, had I the (considerable) funds [ Note X ] and wasn’t so intransigently opposed to its crippling dependence on a pair of BS button cells 😕

Using it today is a wild Eighties throwback. Classic build quality with angular design; Manual focus; Smooth film advance and tactile levers; Boss MD–4 motordrive; Aperture priority automation; Swappable focusing screens; 100% coverage interchangeable (dust–prone) viewfinders; No built–in dioptre correction; No battery–test indicator; Periscopic ADR aperture display; Tiny LCD shutter display with button–press LED illumination; Even tinier ASA film speed numbers; Fingernail operated switches; Both hands to change the exposure compensation dial; 150K rated horizontal–travel Ti foil shutter; 1/80th flash sync; TTL with Nikon SB flashes (only); Accessory AS–4 flash adapter for everything else. Rugged solid metal Rambo II construction. Asymmetrical haircuts, padded shoulders, oversized spectacles, Sizzler and wine coolers. Klack Klack Klack to the tune of Don’t you (forget about me) while “Ronnie Raygun” and Pershing IIs loom ominously over the horizon…

Nikon AiS lenses

Over decades I have cycled through a number of Nikkor F lenses, too many to list, but have found the best of them to be the Ai–S 28mm ƒ2.8, Ai–S 50mm ƒ1.4 and (Afghan girl) Ai–S 105mm ƒ2.5. Eighties era Nikon zoom lenses were substandard, resulting in Pros staggering around with multiple bodies mounted with different primes.

My F3/T came with a “late” Nikkor 50mm F/1.8 Ai–S, which I assume was part of the original 1989 kit. I don’t use it, preferring instead a more modern Voigtländer Ultron 40mm F2 SLII, which I previously used on my digital Sonys from 2014–19.

My compact 40mm Ultron SLII is the 2012 version and shouldn’t be confused with the optically identical but larger/ heavier Nikkor styled 40mm Ultron SLII–S, released in 2017. Both have an AiS aperture cam, so work equally well with Nikon F–mount cameras post 1980.

I also have a spare 3–cam Leica SUMMICRON-R 50mm f/2 II (11345), which I may adapt using a Leitax Leica→Nikon lens mount conversion kit. We’ll see.

Unsurprisingly all my Nikkor lenses play well on the F3/T, although the image in the 0.75 HP viewfinder is a bit small for rapid single–turn focus. Swapping the standard “type K” focusing screen with a “type P” helps. That said, even the best 1980s Nikkor Ai–S glass, while very good, cannot match Leica R ROM lenses for their resolution and “sharp/ smooth” gradation. Have found the Voigtländer 40mm SL II, with its bokeh friendly 9–blade circular aperture, a reasonable compromise, albeit with a slightly wider FOV compared to “nifty fifties”.

Leica IIIG   ↑

Forget the stupid DMC DeLorean, the Leica IIIG is Time Travel With A Vengeance. Mine was made in 1958, six years before I was born.

Using any Leica Thread Mount (LTM) camera is Quirks Mode all the way…

• There are two shutter speed dials, which change over at 1/30th second. The slow dial (B—1/30th) is on the front and the standard dial (1/30—1/1000th) is on top, which also spins when you trip the shutter
• The top 1/1000th speed is Serving Suggestion only. You’d be lucky to get 1/800th, and that’s with a fair wind and your pockets full of four–leaf clovers
• You have to wind the film before setting the shutter speed, and notice how the s/speed dial slowly rotates as you turn the film wind knob
• You need manually reset the film counter dial after (eventually) loading a new roll of film
• The horizontal–travel shutter curtains are made from rubberised silk cloth, which makes them very quiet. Nikon started using dimpled titanium curtains in 1959 because LTM users complained cloth shutters would burn through if you left your camera face up in the sun…
• There are two viewing windows: use the LHS rangefinder for focus and the RHS viewfinder for framing. At least they are located beside each other on the IIIG. On earlier “Barnack” models they are well separated, forcing you to shuttle between the two
• Lenses screw on and off, which is secure albeit slow, with some lenses ending up misaligned with the centre–line not quite at 12 o’clock
• The rubber vulcanite body material has become so old it tends to be crumbly and flake off. Luckily there is an easy fix: scrape the damn stuff off and re–cover using new self–adhesive pre–cut leatherette (did this for mine)
• Film loading requires patience, meticulous dexterity, a couple of pills and a large cup of tea — see Camera West TV (2020) How To Load Film In A Leica Screw Mount Film Camera on YouTube

There is no hinged camera back, so after removing the baseplate you push your film into a separate uptake spindle then poke it through a narrow slit on the base. Many keep the shutter open at “B” so they can see what they are doing from the front, after unscrewing the lens of course. The film leader tongue also has to be longer than usual to avoid getting caught in the shutter. This “tongue” is easy to trim with an “ABLON” template, although many do it by hand. I also have a collection of “IXMOO” brass film cassettes (+ Bakelite film cannisters) which I custom–load using a Watson Model 100 bulk film loader, for that True Leica Experience™.

Got my IIIG in May 2015. A month later bought a 50mm Summicron M39 screw mount (11619) Japanese collector’s lens, to mix ‘n’ match old with new. Have been using the combo intermittently since, although it spends most of its time in a display cabinet now. It is incredibly fiddly to load and use, and having to swap between “standard” and “slow” s/speed dials is an anachronistic PITA. In mine the second shutter curtain has become intermittently sluggish, leaving a narrow overexposed strip on a frame’s edge. Over years I have sent the camera off to various international repairers (my IIIG has circled the globe multiple times), but no one can do anything as spare LTM parts have allegedly vanished.

• 

  An allegorical image about technology during 9/11, taken with a Leica IIIG manufactured before the first human spaceflight…

Nevertheless the IIIG is a beautiful thing, a real icon of 1950s industrial design. But… I have better and more practical cameras, so on display it (mostly) stays. Luckily the rare LTM 50mm ‘cron can be reused on M–mount cameras via a 6-bit encoded Fotodiox LTM–M lens adapter ring.

Leica M6 TTL (0.85)   ↑

Introduction

For years I refused to have anything to do Leica M rangefinder cameras as I considered them overpriced toys for effete dilettantes wealthy enthusiasts. Yet I was so impressed by my Leica R6.2 that I began to wonder if there was something behind the M hype. So in Feb 2000 I bought a cheap 2nd hand Leica M4–2 (10106) from ECS in Paddington. As I didn’t have any M lenses, they rummaged through a spare parts drawer and threw in a beater Summicron–M 50mm (11819) for $100 (which I still use in modified form as a loupe to examine films).

After a few rolls I was hooked. Sold the M4–2 to defray the cost of a new M6 TTL, then started acquiring better condition M lenses. A couple of years later I also got a M4–P and then a 1964 M3— both of which I sold when I went down the Hasselblad route and needed to (temporarily) reduce the GAS.

M6 TTL — one of a kind

The Leica M4-P worked fine, but I found it workaday and uninspiring. It also lacked a built–in lightmeter. My late production M3 was legendary and very inspiring, especially since it had also been overhauled by Leica in Solms. Unfortunately the 1950s film loading scheme was finicky (and no, the “M2/ M3 Quickload Kit (14260)” didn’t help) and the 50/ 90mm viewfinder frustrating → see my Leica FAQ M3 entry.

Enter the chrome Leica M6 TTL 0.85 (10466), which I got new in July 2000.

A few notes about the M6 TTL in the photo:

Custom Leatherette

I replaced the standard vinyl cover with a pre–cut self adhesive skin which better resembled traditional Leica vulcanite. When I peeled off the original, I discovered 1999 written in pencil on the front camera shell, between the battery compartment and “R” rewind switch. Left it untouched for future camera archaeologists…

Soft release shutter button

A 12mm chromed brass Leica Soft Release button (14015) to make slow speed shooting less shaky. I have a collection of similar “softies” made from anodised aerospace alloy — see “Accessories” below.

Hot shoe cover

Is the same Nikon BS–1 accessory shoe cap used on the R9 (and Hasselblad PM-5 prism finder etc.), although I cut a small notch to allow it to mate with the hot shoe front pin. You can get fancier ones from PPP for £UK 10 each (+ postage), presumably the elevated price is for the pin–notch being cut for you. Ditto Japan Camera Hunter for a more luxurious $US 40. There are also plenty of 3rd party alternatives on Etsy, although few (none?) have the notch. If things get desperate you can always 3D print your own nylon version.

Black Leica badge

I replaced the ubiquitous “red dot” with something more Bruce Wayne — see my Leica FAQ.

Elmar–M 50mm II lens

I have a few M lenses but mostly prefer the chrome 50mm Elmar–M (11823) as it has excellent optical qualities, collapses down for transport/ storage and matches the retro look of the M6 TTL. (You can see it collapsed in the “TAR” photo below.) If I didn’t have the Elmar–M, the Voigtländer 50mm f3.5 APO–LANTHAR Type I would work equally well, albeit a ½ stop slower at ƒ3.5. Being an APO design, it would probably yield even better results.

Chrome M4–P base plate)

It isn’t obvious, but I replaced the M6 TTL baseplate with an older one from a chrome M4–P. Did so to enable use of reloadable 1950s “IXMOO” brass film cassettes, as the M4–P baseplate has an internal clutch mechanism linked the external lock key, to Auf/ Zu the film cassette — see my Leica FAQ.

M6 TTL features/ use in detail?

There is already an excellent M6 TTL write up by “Emulsive”, so there is no need to reinvent the wheel.

Controversy Corner

Similar to the R8, the M6 TTL triggered a lot of feelings when it was released in 1998.

Oversized “Wrong way” shutter dial

The s/speed dial has a significantly larger diameter and rotates in a direction opposite to other Leica Ms. Many took exception to this as they had been using their Ms for decades by pinching the smaller more elegant s/speed dial, then turning it the “correct” way. Having to forgo decades of muscle memory to turn it the opposite direction was needlessly distressing and even cruel 😢

TTL at only 1/50th?

More precise flash control was welcome, but it was moot when it only worked with Leica’s underpowered units. X–sync also remained frustratingly slow at 1/50th, ruling out daylight use unless you stopped down to ƒ128 or had a stack of 6–stop ND filters. TTL turned out to be such a damp squib that it was quietly dropped after the Leica M7. Luckily they didn’t change the TTL protocol, so any M6 era flash will still work with current Leicas (pay attention Sony…).

“Bloated” dimensions

The new TTL circuitry required more internal space, so 2.5mm was added to the camera’s height, visible by the larger gap between the rangefinder window and top plate. Many people lost their minds over this: They’ve ruined the timeless aesthetic of classic Ms!

“Flare prone” viewfinder

Online wisdom declared Leica was in financial trouble in the late 1990s, so had to skimp on M6 TTL viewfinder glass and coatings. Er, not quite. While the rangefinder focus patch may sometimes flare, under known conditions, it is an issue for all M models between the M3 and MP — see my Leica FAQ.

Zinc alloy instead of brass

The greatest amount of outrage was reserved for the retention of (lighter, cheap) zinc alloy for the camera top plate instead of reinstating (heavy, expensive) brass. Zinc had been implemented earlier for the Leica M6, to simplify manufacture and reduce weight, although it may have theoretically made the housing more susceptible to cracking and corrosion. Online arguments about this raged at “New Coke” levels for years — see my Leica FAQ. In time the issue turned out to be overblown. After a few zinc problems with early production M6s (eg. see this M6 with a bubbled cover), by 1990 the problems were resolved and my 1999 M6 TTL still looks and works like new. Yet Leica were so shell–shocked about the criticism that they reverted to using brass for subsequent M body shells, although to simplify production they were CNC machined instead of multi–stage forged.

Things I like about the M6 TTL

The shutter speed dial

Yep. Its larger diameter makes it easy to rotate with your index finder while using the viewfinder. It also has a separate “Off” setting to preserve the battery, unlike previous models which use ‘B’ for ‘Bag’. I don’t care it rotates the wrong way. The larger dial was retained on the M7, but dropped in later models due to persistent whining from collectors and very cross grandads.

The shutter

The amazingly quiet shutter is one of the main reasons for getting a Leica M. It is achieved in part by using curtains made from rubberised silk cloth. They are also very hard wearing — in my M6 TTL the curtains are almost 30 years old and still look and work like new. Furthermore, there are stories the shutter mechanism is so robust and under–sprung it can handle at least 400K actuations — see my Leica FAQ. There is a trade–off in that the shutter isn’t particularly accurate, with speeds being routinely out by ± ¼ EV, while the top “1/1000th” setting is aspirational only.

Fully Mechanical

It has internal steel gears to cope with motorised use, is completely mechanical and — aside from the lightmeter — is battery independent. As there is no automation to mess things up, this thing is build to last. It is also the final production M which allows use of Leica “IXMOO” brass film cassettes, provided you switch the baseplate. If you want to see how intricately complicated mechanical Leica Ms can be, see this 2026 Leica M4 restoration video (!)

Built–in Lightmeter

Light through the lens is measured by being reflected off a grey disc printed onto the shutter front curtain. Which is surprisingly effective as it averages any scene contrast. Who needs Nikon F4 computer–controlled matrix metering? The M6 TTL viewfinder display has also been upgraded by the addition of a central LED between two triangles to indicate correct exposure ▶ ● ◀ Only one arrow is lit during under/ over exposure, you then rotate the aperture ring or s/speed dial in the direction indicated until the 3–LED “bow tie” illuminates.

Choice of viewfinder magnifications

0.58 (for 28/ 35mm), 0.72 (general purpose) or 0.85 (for 50/ 75mm). I chose 0.85 as I mostly used 50mm lenses and it has the greatest rangefinder baseline separation for focus accuracy — important for shooting wide open at ƒ2 or beyond (eg. ƒ0.95 Noctilux).

Rare(ish)?

Apparently less than a 1000 silver chrome 0.85 were made, although no one is sure. Considering my simple modifications, it’s safe to say my M6 TTL is unique 🙃

CR1/3N Battery (+ alternatives)

The M6 TTL lightmeter requires a lithium 3V CR1/3N battery, which is becoming increasingly difficult to get. Not impossible (eg. Amazon), but not trivial either. In April 2024 I visited a raft of Sydney CBD electrical/ hardware/ camera stores and struck out every time. A few sales reps had never even heard of them… Eventually I found a couple at a specialist battery store at Sydney’s outskirts — phew! When I vented to the sales guy he gave me a handy tip: they are commonly used in dog shock–collars (!), so contact a pet store if things get desperate (!!)

BTW along with Leica film rangefinders from the M6 onwards, the CR1/3N is also used in the Nikon F2 and F3/T.

Instead of a single Lithium 3V CR1/3N, you can of course use a pair of silver–oxide 1.55V 357/ 303 watch button batteries (aka “SR44”). They are significantly easier to get and a bit cheaper at ≈ $AUD 13 a pair (eg. Bunnings), versus $AUD 16–25 for a CR1/3N. The downside is they don’t last as long in the camera nor in storage (5 vs 10 years), nor work as well in cold/ freezing conditions. At a pinch cheaper alkaline–manganese 1.5V A76/ LR44 cells can also do, although I would avoid using them in precision instruments like cameras.

Rapidwinder

The Tom Abrahamsson Rapidwinder (“TAR”) is a trigger operated mechanical film advance which replaces the baseplate of those M cameras with internal steel gears & slotted motor cams (eg. M4–P onwards). It doesn’t work with older models (M4 and previous) since the cameras lack an internal motor cam and use softer brass gears.

Think of the TAR as a manually operated motordrive, where you advance film by pulling laterally on the spring–loaded lever. You can only advance in one direction because the clutch disengages on the return stroke. You also have to separately press the shutter after each stroke, as you cannot hold it down while repeatedly pulling (yanking?) the trigger. You can however switch mid roll between using the TAR or camera advance lever without changing the camera base.

The TAR was so successful it “inspired” Leica to design their own version in 2003: the Leicavit M (14676). Yet the TAR was mechanically simpler, more reliable and cheaper — see the TAR website and my Leica FAQ.

Unfortunately Tom died in Jan 2017, so you can only get them 2nd hand now, at unconscionably inflated prices. I bought mine new in Oct 2001 and it is not for sale [ Note VIII ].

Leica Motor M

As mentioned earlier, I used a M4–P to shoot mainly 360° panoramas. With a 16mm full–frame fisheye lens this required a sequence of 8× frames to cover a full circle. Initially I advanced film by hand, but after a few rolls was irritated enough to get a Leica Motor M (14408).

It is far more compact than the 1980s “Leica Winder M”, with two speed settings of “I” (1.5 FPS) and “II” (3 FPS). Neither speed is particularly loud — especially compared to the “Hasselpanzer” or Nikon MD–4 !

It uses a pair of 3V 123A batteries and unlike the R8 winder or MD–4 motordrive, they do not power the lightmeter — you need an additional CR1/3N in the camera body. This shouldn’t be surprising as there are no electrical connections between Motor M and camera. Similar to the “TAR”, the Motor M allows manual film advance while the motor is still attached, but cannot rewind film.

Worth it? Depends how much you shoot. It is fantastic if you hammer through rolls, but for occasional individual frames — not really. Again, see my Leica FAQ.

DIY Leather Wrap

When I first posted photos of my leather wrap in a Leica forum in 2003, it drew a lot of collegial admiration: A case is like sticking a ‘car bra’ on the front of an otherwise beautiful sports car … That’s the stupidest damn thing I have ever seen! … Does it come with tatts, studs and a nose–ring? … I would be ashamed to go out onto the street with such a ^%&#ing ugly thing!

Unlike the bottom half of a Leica 14870 case, my wrap is made from a single piece of 5mm full grain leather hide (with a rolled surface pattern, bought from a tannery). It is lined internally with 2mm felt and held together by four brass press studs. At the rear I cut a 10mm hole for the viewfinder and added a vertical cable–tie with 2× Peak Design Strap Anchors. I cut the leather by hand using electrician’s shears + an artist’s scalpel, then finished the edges with fine emery board and a paint pen. The leather was treated with preserver then Dubbin. The photo was taken in Nov 2025, twenty–two years after I made it. Like its maker it has aged rather well 😉

Rationale? Cheap; No need to fumble with a “never ready” case as the camera is always ready; It keeps greasy finger marks off the body; It helps protect the camera from scratches and bumps; It muffles the shutter sound a lot, although not as much as a dedicated blimp; Is soft, pliable, feels & smells great (!)

Do I sell them? No. Can I send you a template? No.

I notice you can buy “Artisan & Artist” half–cases now, but they are significantly thinner so won’t muffle the shutter nor protect the body as much.

Leica M Accessories

Over decades I have found the following useful:

“AUFSU” finder

An accessory right–angle viewfinder made in the 1930–40s, which slides into the camera's flash accessory shoe. It can be used in landscape or portrait format, and contains a tiny silvered pentaprism to display the scene right way up with correct lateral orientation. As you can imagine it is fantastic for candid shots, although I find the image rather small nowadays. I have added a hotshoe bubble level to help reduce “Dutch angles”. In recent years collectors have pushed up prices to insane levels. More detail at my Leica FAQ.

Brightline Finders

I have two by Voigtländer: 35mm and 50mm (see YouTube video). They act as auxiliary viewfinders with (very) bright frame lines and are only useful for framing, as they don’t couple with the rangefinder. Again, see my Leica FAQ.

Abrahamsson “softies”

These were made by Tom Abrahamsson from 7000 series aluminium and (with great difficulty) anodised. From L to R in the photo: red mini, black chrome regular, titanium regular, silver chrome mini — the latter I buffed into a mother of pearl finish.

Flash sync terminal socket cap

You can get generic plastic versions for spare change. Original Leica versions are laughably expensive.

Leica “red dot” badge

In the early 2000s they were a spare part you could order directly from Leica as Badge circular ‘Leica’, 710 271 000 000. They were (of course) expensive and I don’t know if they are still available.

Shooting with the M6 TTL

Since most of my work is now digital, I don’t use the M6 TTL anywhere near as much as I did twenty years ago. Even when I shoot film it’s mostly 120 medium format. I also I prefer the R9 or F3/T for the (very) occasional roll of 135. Yet… there is nothing like working with a rangefinder camera. Maybe one day I will get a 2nd hand (digital) Leica M10–R (20003). Maybe. One day…

• 

  In the early 2000s one of the best ways to shoot candids was with rangefinder camera, here my Leica M6 TTL