Olympus FTL Camera - Anyone know much about this camera?

[Turnipfarmer]

Hey everyone

Just picked up this little beauty in a charity shop this afternoon. I can't seem to find out much about it.

Anyone know much about the Olympus FTL camera and is it any good?

Came with 50mm f1.8 and 135mm f3.5 both in excellent condition.

 

[pdeeh]

Without wanting to sound snitty, I just googled "olympus ftl" and found several pages all about it
e.g. http://www.biofos.com/cornucop/ftl.html

 

[Turnipfarmer]

Without wanting to sound snitty, I just googled "olympus ftl" and found several pages all about it
e.g. http://www.biofos.com/cornucop/ftl.html

Lol, thanks. What I should have asked is if any other members have one and their opinion of it?

 

[Rick A]

My first 35 mm SLR, great camera. Built in-house by Olympus while they were working out the bugs on the OM system. I burned many a roll through mine before finally stepping up to an OM-1. I believe it used the same meter as the OM, I don't recall much more about it, it's been many decades ago since I owned it.

 

[flavio81]

An M42 camera built by Olympus can't be a bad thing at all, i'd guess.

 

[Xmas]

It is an ok camera as a shooter and collectable.

You just got a bargain.

 

[randyB]

I never owned one but while working a photo store in the early 70's I was able to "check out" most of the equipment we sold. When the FTL came out I used one several times and was impressed with the quality and then the OM1 came out, big game changer, no one even looked at the FTL, they all wanted the OM1. It is a quality camera and the lenses are very good.

 

[Brett Rogers]

I've got one. Found it cheaply at a local market with the 50mm Zuiko f/1.8. It was basically working but be aware that unlike some Japanese SLRs (Eg. SRT101) the light seals are not belt and braces, if they are not in good order you will get light leaks. So make sure these are up to scratch.

My example was overall in very good condition except a little missing black paint on the front cover, I've seen a few suffering from this so I gather it's not unknown. You can fill in the missing paint easily enough, if you're handy with that sort of thing.

The one I found has a good accurate meter and works well. The only issue after running a roll of Kodak Ultramax through it was that the 1/1000 (and possibly 1/500 speed) were capping a bit. I didn't notice this at the time so there were a couple of frames on the film that were only partly exposed. It sat in the cabinet for a while (too many cameras, not enough time) but I pulled it out a couple of weeks ago and investigated the fault. It seemed the first curtain wasn't keeping ahead of the second at the higher speeds so I took a stab that the springs had lost a little tension. After removing the lower cover (the typical pain free exercise it is with most older Japanese SLRs) I was able to increase the curtain tension very slightly, and, following this, the 1/1000 speed came good right across the gate. I still haven't replaced the light seals (I used black tape as insurance to quickly run a test roll through) so when I have a half hour or so free I'll do this and then the FTL will be fully fit for service. I'm not exactly lacking in M42 bodies but the FTL is a very competent camera and I expect it to get some use later this year.

Ivor Matanle mentions the 50mm Zuiko in his book "Collecting and Using Classic SLRs" and rates the Zuiko quite highly, ahead of even the equivalent Takumar. As an interim model between the half frame Pen F and the OM-1, the FTL is significant as Olympus's first full frame 35mm SLR, but with the OM in the pipeline, it had a short production life cycle and just a few thousand were made. It's therefore, potentially, one of the more collectible earlier Olympus cameras, and very usable, so it's recommended if one encounters a sound example at a reasonable price.
Cheers
Brett

 

[thuggins]

Built in-house by Olympus while they were working out the bugs on the OM system.

Actually, as the story goes the FTL was somewhat of an in-house competitor to the OM. There were some at Olympus that were not confident that Maitani would be able to make good on his promise of the OM and they wanted something safe and more conventional to replace the half frame Pens. There has been some debate as to whether the FTL was designed in house or whether this was subcontracted out, but the consensus seems to be that it is a true Olympus.

Olympus advertised the open aperture metering, but I don't know if this was the first screw mount camera to allow open aperture metering. There was a small system made, consisting of a 28f3.5, 35f2.8, 50f1.8, 50f1.4, 135f3.5 and 200f4. So now you can set your goal to collecting all the lenses! The aperture setting on all the lenses was clickless, to facilitate dialing in the correct aperture.

As pointed out above, once the OM hit the market it was all over for the FTL. It is not that it is a bad camera; I personally like mine and find it very usable. But it did not stand out from everything else on the market while the OM certainly did.

One thing I found interesting was that the shape of the film advance lever was changed at some point. The original one was long and pointed and looked like it came off of the 35 SP. This was changed to a stubby one with a flat pad on the end. My theory is that since the viewfinder was in the middle of the camera (unlike a rangefinder where it was over to the side), the long pointed lever would poke you in the right eye if you used the left eye on the viewfinder (at least that is how it worked for me).

 

[Rick A]

It's also interesting to note, Olympus had to approve the design, then tool up to manufacture the FTL line, all the while working on building the OM line. The FTL's were on the market well over a year prior to the OM-1 making its debut. I certainly enjoyed my FTL, I had the Zuiko 28, 50/1.4, and 135 lenses. I also had a couple aftermarket lenses, one notably was an Asanuma zoom that was a neck breaker when I carried it, but sweet on a tripod. That was my go to lens at Watkins Glen shooting the USGP.

 

[Les Sarile]

The only knock against the FTL is that Mr. Yoshihisa Maitani did not design it. The FTL and its lenses were not the only casualties from the release of the OM-1 as practically most - if not all, manufacturers had to abandon their lineup to redesign for a smaller camera.

 

[flavio81]

The only knock against the FTL is that Mr. Yoshihisa Maitani did not design it.

Also, on the link provided previously, Maitani says the camera was NOT designed by Olympus but by other manufacturers. From the looks of it, it might have been Canon (see the Canon EX), or Yashica (shape of the prism housing) (?)

 

[Les Sarile]

To date there is no conclusive evidence who actually designed the FTL just that Mr. Yoshihisa Maitani did not.

He said, "Though Olympus wanted to make a 35mm, I didn't feel that I had to do it, because SLRs were already on the shelves in camera shops for everyone to buy."

More from him at http://www.olympus-global.com/en/corc/history/lecture/lecture2/

 

[thuggins]

To date there is no conclusive evidence who actually designed the FTL just that Mr. Yoshihisa Maitani did not.

He said, "Though Olympus wanted to make a 35mm, I didn't feel that I had to do it, because SLRs were already on the shelves in camera shops for everyone to buy."

More from him at http://www.olympus-global.com/en/corc/history/lecture/lecture2/

This is a very important point. Mr. Maitani obviously eschewed the FTL as being no different or better than other 35mm SLR's on the market. His dismissive remarks have been misinterpreted as meaning the FTL was bought from the outside (either the design or the whole camera). This view is generally rejected now and Maitani's remarks are considered an indication that he had no interest in the FTL, never paid any attention to how it was developed, and considered it to be beneath his dignity to even be asked about it.

 

[ciniframe]

Regarding the FTL, at the time it came out I remembered being disappointed. I was already, because of the Pen F, an Olympus fan and for full frame was expecting something more innovative. My full frame SLR at the time was a Miranda G and I had grown fond of interchangeable screens. To this day I cannot abide split-wedge or micro prism focusing aids messing up my view, I always use plain matte screens. (That is why I like the Pen F over the FT or FV) At the time Maitani was designing the new full frame camera the OM style platform was not the only one considered. There was a sort of mini Hasselblad concept type of camera with a mirror/shutter box, film backs, and various finders and screens. This apparently was deemed too complicated and expensive to develop so a more conventional layout was adopted. The debate as to the design and development and building and purpose of the FTL seems to have no definitive answer. When the OM-1 arrived it finally checked off most of my boxes and I've used them ever since. Still have a modest Pen F system also.

As an aside, when Maitani designed the first half frame VF type camera the initial assembly was outsourced to a company set up for that purpose, Sanko Shoji, set up by Kimura koki, a company regarded a experts on making focusing helicals. They handled production from Oct. 59 to May 60 until Olympus could take over. I have one of the late (april 1960) Sanko Shoji Pens, it still works fine.

 

[Sirius Glass]

A free Olympus FLT manual, but please donate $3US if you find it useful since Butkis does this out of his own pocket.
http://www.butkus.org/chinon/olympus.htm

 

[albada]

I have one. It's a good solid camera, but with nothing special about it except that the aperture-setting is communicated to the body, allowing for open-aperture metering.
The FTL is the only camera that was named after the instructions for using it:

Find The Light.
Flip The Lever.
Focus The Lens.
Forget The Lightroom (their dig against digital).
​

On a serious note, I'm surprised that Olympus had the staff and money to design and manufacture two unrelated cameras so quickly.

Mark Overton

 

[phil0]

I had one. It was one of several cameras that attempted to jigger the M42 mount to open aperture metering. Good solid camera but nothing special.
Fuji did the same thing.
Neither were successful as they were me-too cameras. Nothing special.
The OM-1 was.

 

[Brett Rogers]

I had one. It was one of several cameras that attempted to jigger the M42 mount to open aperture metering. Good solid camera but nothing special.
Fuji did the same thing.
Neither were successful as they were me-too cameras. Nothing special.
The OM-1 was.

Attempted? So what you're saying is the open aperture metering didn't work? I've only put one roll through the one I have since getting it a couple of years ago, but the last time I looked at the metering seemed to be working and accurate. Actually on that point, I also have a Fujica ST705W I scored a while ago, which I haven't yet used, and when I checked it out prior to buying it, the open aperture metering of that was spot on, too. I must be lucky to have the only two examples of either type of camera with meters that succeed, in working rather than attempting to do so.

I have heard Minolta also made some SLRs from around the mid 1960s that had a metering system which attempted to provide open aperture metering. SRT I believe they were called. Maybe some of them actually worked, too. Who knew?

 

[Bill Burk]

... Mr. Yoshihisa Maitani ...

More from him at http://www.olympus-global.com/en/corc/history/lecture/lecture2/part15.html

Mr. Yoshihisa Maitani sure has me figured out... Everything he says about "males" in this part of his lecture pertains to me. I like gadgets, especially if they look like cameras.

 

[Turnipfarmer]

Many thanks for the replies everyone, interesting reading from you all.

Yeah I picked this camera up for £45 with the camera (with original FTL case), 135mm f3.5 and 50mm f1.8, all FTL fit with the pin on so very happy with the purchase, even got some original advertising material inside.

Now I am such a newbie when it comes to film camera, when you guys get a new (old) film camera how do you go about testing it? My camera has got a film (expired probably) inside it with only couple shots fired off, to test it do you rattle off all the shots on the film in one go and then get the film developed? Whats your camera testing workflow?

I have no idea if the light meter works OK yet as its missing a battery, I think I know which it needs to get it working and how do I test the accuracy of the light meter and shutter speeds too?

You mention the light seals, again can I only tell if these are faulty by getting the film processed? I don't want to open the back up and ruin the film inside it (what ever film it is as there is no window on the FTL)

 

[flavio81]

Now I am such a newbie when it comes to film camera, when you guys get a new (old) film camera how do you go about testing it? My camera has got a film (expired probably) inside it with only couple shots fired off, to test it do you rattle off all the shots on the film in one go and then get the film developed? Whats your camera testing workflow?

I have no idea if the light meter works OK yet as its missing a battery, I think I know which it needs to get it working and how do I test the accuracy of the light meter and shutter speeds too?

You mention the light seals, again can I only tell if these are faulty by getting the film processed? I don't want to open the back up and ruin the film inside it (what ever film it is as there is no window on the FTL)

Remove the film inside it (rewind it, of course).

Now, for testing:

0. Check for signs of the camera having been dropped or strongly bumped. Also check for corrosion or oxide stains. If camera has no such signs, chances are that everything is all fine inside.

1. Try the 1 second shutter speed and compare it with a chronometer. If it's within 0.8 sec to 1.4 seconds then it's just fine. If it's 2 seconds then all the lower speeds (1/15 and down) will be off.

2. Try the 1000, 500, 250, 125, 60, 30 speeds by looking through the shutter curtain with no lens and confirm that speeds are indeed different.

3. Use a flash at the flash sync speed. Confirm that the whole frame is exposed.

4. Check the mirror bumper foam and the foams that are light seals.

5. Check that when focusing to a really distant object (>50m), the infinity stop is correctly aligned on the 2 lenses you own. If it's misaligned on both, then it's the camera fault.

6. Only way to be sure light seals are OK is by loading an ISO 400 film and using the camera outdoors (during the day), and then developing the film!

7. Check for film advance smoothness, any undue resistance or strange noise will indicate dust or particles on the mechanism and/or lack of lubrication.

OLYMPUS is not my favorite camera maker but chances are that the camera you own is still working perfectly. OLYMPUS lenses are good and due to the conservative rating of your lenses (50/1.8, 135/3.5), i bet the optics will perform great.

If you want suggestion on more M42 lenses to buy, my brand recommendations are Fuji, Pentax, and Mamiya. And, of course, Carl Zeiss Jena (CZJ).

 

[Turnipfarmer]

Remove the film inside it (rewind it, of course).

Now, for testing:

0. Check for signs of the camera having been dropped or strongly bumped. Also check for corrosion or oxide stains. If camera has no such signs, chances are that everything is all fine inside.

1. Try the 1 second shutter speed and compare it with a chronometer. If it's within 0.8 sec to 1.4 seconds then it's just fine. If it's 2 seconds then all the lower speeds (1/15 and down) will be off.

2. Try the 1000, 500, 250, 125, 60, 30 speeds by looking through the shutter curtain with no lens and confirm that speeds are indeed different.

3. Use a flash at the flash sync speed. Confirm that the whole frame is exposed.

4. Check the mirror bumper foam and the foams that are light seals.

5. Check that when focusing to a really distant object (>50m), the infinity stop is correctly aligned on the 2 lenses you own. If it's misaligned on both, then it's the camera fault.

6. Only way to be sure light seals are OK is by loading an ISO 400 film and using the camera outdoors (during the day), and then developing the film!

7. Check for film advance smoothness, any undue resistance or strange noise will indicate dust or particles on the mechanism and/or lack of lubrication.

OLYMPUS is not my favorite camera maker but chances are that the camera you own is still working perfectly. OLYMPUS lenses are good and due to the conservative rating of your lenses (50/1.8, 135/3.5), i bet the optics will perform great.

If you want suggestion on more M42 lenses to buy, my brand recommendations are Fuji, Pentax, and Mamiya. And, of course, Carl Zeiss Jena (CZJ).

Awesome, many thanks for the detailed reply.

I know this might sound stupid, I have taken the film out like you mentioned, should I just throw this away now. Just given it the once over following your guide.

0. No signs of it being dropped and no dings or dents. No signs of corrosion or oxidation that I can see. Looks clean inside apart from slight dust and dirt where the film is, will give it a good clean out soon. One thing I that I have noticed is that the film advance is aa little sluggish, I can move it to advance film but when it returns back to normal position its a little slow and does'nt fully return, not a massive problem but is there an easy way or servicing this part? The camera does have a lot of surface dirt on the body around that area which I have yet to clean off with IPA etc so that might help.

1. Tried 1 second timer, ran approx 5 tests and got roughly 1.1-1.2 sec so all looks good there.

2. Yes they all look good and I can see a difference everytime I change the shutter speed.

3. Test still to do, I suppose the only way to do this is to take a few shots with film in?

4. It appears to be good and not broken down, no bits inside the shutter housing, I presume thats good? What am I looking for if its turned bad? The foams on the light seals look OK although may need replacing at some point, shall I get a photo and upload here and see what you think as I am not sure what a good one or bad one looks like? My gut instinct says it looks good.

5. Yup looks good on both lenses.

6. Will get some ISO 400 from local shop tomorrow and report back on it (after I have cleaned camera of course)

7. No strange noises or grinding but there is a little bit of resistance and slow to return to normal position and doesn't quite fully get there, I think it may require oiling.

One last question, how do I test the light meter? It requires a mercury free replacement but can't find which one it is.

 

[flavio81]

Awesome, many thanks for the detailed reply.

I know this might sound stupid, I have taken the film out like you mentioned, should I just throw this away now. Just given it the once over following your guide.

0. No signs of it being dropped and no dings or dents. No signs of corrosion or oxidation that I can see. Looks clean inside apart from slight dust and dirt where the film is, will give it a good clean out soon. One thing I that I have noticed is that the film advance is aa little sluggish, I can move it to advance film but when it returns back to normal position its a little slow and does'nt fully return, not a massive problem but is there an easy way or servicing this part? The camera does have a lot of surface dirt on the body around that area which I have yet to clean off with IPA etc so that might help.

1. Tried 1 second timer, ran approx 5 tests and got roughly 1.1-1.2 sec so all looks good there.

2. Yes they all look good and I can see a difference everytime I change the shutter speed.

3. Test still to do, I suppose the only way to do this is to take a few shots with film in?

4. It appears to be good and not broken down, no bits inside the shutter housing, I presume thats good? What am I looking for if its turned bad? The foams on the light seals look OK although may need replacing at some point, shall I get a photo and upload here and see what you think as I am not sure what a good one or bad one looks like? My gut instinct says it looks good.

5. Yup looks good on both lenses.

6. Will get some ISO 400 from local shop tomorrow and report back on it (after I have cleaned camera of course)

7. No strange noises or grinding but there is a little bit of resistance and slow to return to normal position and doesn't quite fully get there, I think it may require oiling.

One last question, how do I test the light meter? It requires a mercury free replacement but can't find which one it is.

7. If it is sluggish to return it might be because some grease has hardened. Or some dirt got inside. In any case, i would not worry at all. To repair this you might want to try disassembling the advance lever, but only of course if you have done such things before.

For the light meter,

The meter requires a PX625 *mercury* battery, which is not manufactured anymore. Your best bet is to buy a "675"-type hearing aid battery (actual chemical type: zinc-air) which gives the correct voltage and constantly. You will have to figure out how to fit the 675 cell inside the battery housing while making sure the battery contacts connect. Usually you can achieve this by using cardboard bits (to center the 675 cell in place) and aluminium paper (if the battery contacts are too far).

Don't use the PX625A *alkaline* batteries; the voltage given is wrong and it varies over time.

Anyway, there is a lot of information on PX625 battery substitution on the 'net.