Last Manual 35mm SLR

[thuggins]

I've been playing with an essentially new Exa 1c and got to wondering. Were there any other manufacturers making an all manual camera at that time (mid 1980's)?

I'm not talking about an OM-3Ti, which though manual, is essentially the anti-Exa 1c. I mean an unmetered, completely bare bones, bottom of the barrel starter camera.

 

[AgX]

Pentacon : Praktica MTL3, PLC3
...................Pentacon Six TL
...................EXA 1c

Exakta : 66 model 1&2

KMZ: Zenit EM

Lomo: Almaz 103

Nikon: FM2

Cosina

Phenix

 

[abruzzi]

I don’t know how many unmetered 35mm SLRs were made in the 80’s. By that point most 35mm SLRs had meters. Probably the last unmetered camera Nikon made was the F2 with the unmetered prism, but that ended in 1979/1980 or so, and definitely wasn’t a beginner camera.

On the other hand, medium format SLRs were almost all available in unmetered completely manual versions up into the 2000’s. But many had electrically controlled shutters.

EDIT: I’d also add that at the time, I doubt unmetered cameras were considered starter cameras. You can see that in the difference between 35mm and medium format. The bottom of the barrel starter cameras were thing that provided minimal manual control like the Nikon EM or the Pentax ME

 

[AgX]

"Manual" not necessarily means "unmetered" . I understood the OP's "manual" as without autoexposure.

Otherwise there would be aside the Exa an empty field by the mid-80s. (Zenit B already 1974(!) was cancelled, Praktica L2 cancelled 1978)



(Concerning unmeterd cameras I would even exclude unmeterd MF SLRs, as they all coukld be upgraded be a metering prism.)

 

[ciniframe]

Not unmetered but, if you mean all mechanical, battery only for meter, will operate without batteries and manual exposure setting. Then:
Pentax K1000 (bought new as gift for my sister in 1985)
Ricoh KR-5 and rebadged variations.
As mentioned several Praktica models.
Cosina made models for Nikon (FM-10) and various other ‘house brands’.
Oh, I dunno, probably several more.

 

[mshchem]

Cosina?? Made a Vivitar body, I had one briefly, it was a decent cheap SLR that took K mount lenses, I think I paid 20 bucks for it, gave it to a friend. Freestyle sold these up until 10-12 ? years ago. As cheap as Nikon F3 bodies are that's still what I recommend, might have to look for one that's nice and cheap, someone wanting to get rid of it.

 

[abruzzi]

"Manual" not necessarily means "unmetered" . I understood the OP's "manual" as without autoexposure.

He did specifically state unmetered: "I mean an unmetered, completely bare bones, bottom of the barrel starter camera" which is what I was responding to.

 

[ciniframe]

The last commonly available unmetered 35mm SLR would probably be a Nikon F2 with a plain prism. Don’t know when they finished up production on the model but Pentax sold a M42 mount model without a meter, but I cannot remember the model designation of that model.

 

[ic-racer]

Fixed prism 35mm SLR with no meter post 1970 is going to be a short list. The only two 35mm SLRs wtih no meter I have are Edixa and Practica, but guess what, both have removable prisms.

 

[abruzzi]

The last commonly available unmetered 35mm SLR would probably be a Nikon F2 with a plain prism. Don’t know when they finished up production on the model but Pentax sold a M42 mount model without a meter, but I cannot remember the model designation of that model.

The last unmetered Pentax 35mm was the Spotmatic SL which was sometime in the late 60’s. Nikon’s last unmetered camera (aside from the F and F2 with the unmetered prism) was the Nikkormat FS in the mid-60s. Canon, Olympus, and Minolta I don’t know. I’m sure there were Soviet and/or Eastern European cameras made later without meters, but I’m not remotely versed in those models.

 

[AgX]

He did specifically state unmetered: "I mean an unmetered, completely bare bones, bottom of the barrel starter camera" which is what I was responding to.

I stand corrected. (Correct reading is benefitial...)


Then it remains by the EXA 1c:

Otherwise there would be aside the Exa an empty field by the mid-80s. (Zenit B already 1974(!) was cancelled, Praktica L2 cancelled 1978)

 

[AgX]

And I would not call an SLR without meter a starter camera.

At days when built-in meters, and be it a selenium meter (eg. Zenit E, Praktica LB2), were standard, a unmetered version was offered to my understanding for users who:

-) grew up so to say with handheld metering and had a meter, who want a cheap SLR
(even if is their first SLR, in such case I would not speak of starter)
-) by purpose employ only handheld metering
-) use an SLR with fixed settings



The Exa 1c then again is such a special breed, that it could not compete even with an unmetered Zenit. About its market by the mid 80s I am not sure. Just the price? Or the fact that it was cheap AND offered a WL finder?

 

[abruzzi]

In a more general sense perhaps the last "bottom of the barrel" "beginners camera" was the Cosina made Nikon FM10. It was made up until fairly recently. I've never held one, but supposedly it is mechanical only requiring batteries for the meter.

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

It's not 35mm, but the Fujica GSW 690 and the GW690 released in November 1978. Can't get more manual than that. I love the barebones quality of the camera compared to viewfinders of digital cameras that overload my brain.

 

[perkeleellinen]

Perhaps the Zenit E made until 1986

 

[Chan Tran]

"Manual" not necessarily means "unmetered" . I understood the OP's "manual" as without autoexposure.

Otherwise there would be aside the Exa an empty field by the mid-80s. (Zenit B already 1974(!) was cancelled, Praktica L2 cancelled 1978)



(Concerning unmeterd cameras I would even exclude unmeterd MF SLRs, as they all coukld be upgraded be a metering prism.)

Many people define manual in a different ways. I think the OP meant a fully mechanical camera and no meter. To some a manual camera has to be fully mechanical but no meter. To others a manual camera can have electronically controlled shutter, motor drive film advance and meter but no automatic exposure control. Yet to some a manual camera is simply one that doesn't have autofocus.
But to answer the OP question I think the Leica M4-2 is a manual camera that is it's mechanical and has no built in meter and is a 35mm but it's not an SLR.

 

[abruzzi]

But to answer the OP question I think the Leica M4-2 is a manual camera that is it's mechanical and has no built in meter and is a 35mm but it's not an SLR.

true, but at ~$1500-$5000 (based on a quick eBay search) its pretty far from a "bottom of the barrel starter camera", though I don't know where it fell on the price scale when it was new. (is the "Leica tax" a new thing or has it always been there?)

 

[JWMster]

Yes, the Leica M4-2 fits that description. Very solid, and despite the "it's Canadian - not German - and therefore not a Leica" viewpoint... c'mon. It's a Leica. It's a SLR - if you allow that to mean Single Lens RANGEFINDER. Given that I tend to think of TLR's more as Twin Lens Rangefinder's than Twin Lens Reflex. 'cause you DON"T look through the shooting lens.. But now I'm digressing in the distressing lack of correspondence between common usage and what our terms actually refer to. Who comes up with this stuff?

So when we think what is automatic and what is manual... of course it's going to be fuzzy.

 

[4season]

There were Seagull TLRs, any number of KMZ and Belomo Zenits, KMZ panoramic cameras, and from Zavod Arsenal, variants of the Kiev 60 and Kiev 88. Not sure when the Great Wall JG50 rangefinder (aka "Yasuhara T981") made it's appearance, but it's relatively modern too.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Perhaps the Zenit E made until 1986

Isn't E stands for electronics? But most of Zenits are electronics free after crappy electronics stopped working.

Yes, the Leica M4-2 fits that description. Very solid, and despite the "it's Canadian - not German - and therefore not a Leica" viewpoint... c'mon. It's a Leica. It's a SLR - if you allow that to mean Single Lens RANGEFINDER. Given that I tend to think of TLR's more as Twin Lens Rangefinder's than Twin Lens Reflex. 'cause you DON"T look through the shooting lens.. But now I'm digressing in the distressing lack of correspondence between common usage and what our terms actually refer to. Who comes up with this stuff?

So when we think what is automatic and what is manual... of course it's going to be fuzzy.

OP asked for SLR, not RF. Also, FYI, M4-P is also made in Canada and it came after M4-2 in 1980...
Smena, FED were made in millions through all of the eighties.

 

[AgX]

Doesn't [Zenit] E stands for electronics?

No electronics at all. Unless you call the selenium cell and galvanometer electronics.

 

[Chan Tran]

true, but at ~$1500-$5000 (based on a quick eBay search) its pretty far from a "bottom of the barrel starter camera", though I don't know where it fell on the price scale when it was new. (is the "Leica tax" a new thing or has it always been there?)

For the body I think about $1500 when was new. But it's equivalent to an MP today I would say. So it's a high end 35mm camera.
Just check the ad from B&H from April 1983. An M4-P body was $819 and a 50mm f/2 was $309.

 

[abruzzi]

For the body I think about $1500 when was new. But it's equivalent to an MP today I would say. So it's a high end 35mm camera.
Just check the ad from B&H from April 1983. An M4-P body was $819 and a 50mm f/2 was $309.

thanks for that info. If this page is true, a FM2 in 1983 (body) was $364, so the Leica was about twice the price of a very good consumer Nikon:

https://camerapedia.fandom.com/wiki/Nikon_FM2

And according to this page, $440 for a F3:

https://kenrockwell.com/nikon/f3.htm

So definitely high end, but not quite the price differential we see today in both the new and used market.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

No electronics at all. Unless you call the selenium cell and galvanometer electronics.

enlighte me how is called then?

 

[AgX]

Model "E", but don't ask me what that stands for. Or that "B" or "122". As with other manufacturers the namegiving is enigmatic.