Praktica Appreciation Thread

Ian Brett Cooper · Aug 27, 2020

Does anyone know where the B-series electronic components were made? The other day I was skimming through some website and I thought I read that they were made in Japan. Then today, I was reading a forum somewhere and someone was saying that Praktica electronic components were bad (which of course made my blood boil) and he/she put it down to shoddy Soviet Bloc tech. I just think that, if they were made in Japan, it would be nice, if anyone makes a similar accusation in the future, to be able to set the record straight.

On a related note, has anyone noticed that Praktica cameras seem to suffer from pretty overt anti-Soviet bias? I mean, I don't think the cameras deserve the bad reputation they seem to have, especially here in the USA. I've even seen some photography articles online that seem almost laughably mired in Cold War propaganda. One example was that a reviewer scorned the Praktica MTL5b, suggesting its lack of electronics was an example of the Soviets not being able to keep up with the West, when the reality was that Praktica had released a fully electronic B200 six years before the MTL5b came onto the market. So it seems to me that the MTL5b was more an example of Praktica seeing value in offering a line of more traditional cameras at a time when everyone else was obsessing over making photography into a digital art form.

Of course, the flipside of the anti-Praktica bias is that it makes it a bit easier to find Praktica products at a low price.

AgX · Aug 27, 2020

The Flexboard was made by Pentacon. But at the start of the B-serie that board was not availabe and it had to be acquired toll-made from NEC in Japan for about two years. Only with the 2nd B-model a german board was used. (I assume that by that time the 1st model got a german board too.)

AgX · Aug 27, 2020

However there is some truth in those allegations. The GDR had an over the years even growing backlog (even compared to some other Comecon countries) in the development/production of semiconductors. Partially caused by (in hindsight) wrong semiconductor technologies by planning commitees.
Another factor were bans on exports of semiconductor technologies etc. to the whole Comecon under US pressure/guidance.

However certain semiconductors not being used, not neceassaily meant that such did not exist but availability was a matter of priority.

I know a case were at the GDR machine industry CAD/CAM machines for western export got the digital controls from a west-german manufacturer. Either because such was not available, or (more likely) as a proven western control seemingly was more trustworthy in the minds of western buyers.

In the very last years of thr GDR the government tried to correct this backlog by massive investment in the design and production of a new memory-chip, as pilot project for a new IC-industry. When the chip finally showed up, the GDR went under.

Agulliver · Aug 28, 2020

Regarding lack of Praktica B lenses, I would think that many users bought a kit with some generic 35-70 zoom lens and never bothered to buy any more. I don't know how these cameras were sold in other countries, but in the 80s I usually saw cameras like the BCA and BX20 in Dixons offered at less than half the price of Pentax models, bundled with a kit lens and sometimes a flash. Great value for money for sure. I got a BCA that way but the first of my two BX20S bodies was bought direct from Pentacon in Dresden...the second being more recently acquired via eBay.

Prakticar and CZJ lenses were available (in practise one and the same) but not in the high street shops like Dixons. The "proper" camera shops wouldn't touch them so there was mail order or going to a large shop in, say, London. In the 80s and 90s Sigma produced a good number of B-mount lenses. If memory serves they used Pentacon distribution networks when they entered the European market, and in return offered their lenses with PB mounts. I have a very nice 28-200 and a 35-200 from Sigma....the other source of glass would be Tamron Adaptall with the correct mount. Again not something the high street chains would stock - but a real camera shop would. However I wonder how many Praktica owners descended on real camera shops? Cultures vary but I distinctly remember in the 80s and 90s in England....owning a Praktica of any kind lead to disdain from anyone in the business....my suspicion was always because they made less money from Pentacon products than the Japanese or West German ones. Then and now, I get photos no better or worse from a Praktica SLR compared to a Nikon SLR. Though I can accept that the Nikon is more refined, in all honesty a little mirror slap never hurt me.

AgX · Aug 28, 2020

Thank you for that report on shopping endeavours.

How great margins were on what brand should even deserve a thread on its own . Interesting topic.

Agulliver said:
Prakticar and CZJ lenses were available (in practise one and the same)

Meyer lenses from 1970/71 on were designated "Pentacon"
Meyer and CZJ lenses with bayonet mount from 1978/79 on were designated "Pentacon Prakticar" resp. "Prakticar", seemingly also including M42 mount (information on this all varies)

chuck3565 · Aug 28, 2020

Agulliver said:
Regarding lack of Praktica B lenses, I would think that many users bought a kit with some generic 35-70 zoom lens and never bothered to buy any more. I don't know how these cameras were sold in other countries, but in the 80s I usually saw cameras like the BCA and BX20 in Dixons offered at less than half the price of Pentax models, bundled with a kit lens and sometimes a flash. Great value for money for sure. I got a BCA that way but the first of my two BX20S bodies was bought direct from Pentacon in Dresden...the second being more recently acquired via eBay.

Prakticar and CZJ lenses were available (in practise one and the same) but not in the high street shops like Dixons. The "proper" camera shops wouldn't touch them so there was mail order or going to a large shop in, say, London. In the 80s and 90s Sigma produced a good number of B-mount lenses. If memory serves they used Pentacon distribution networks when they entered the European market, and in return offered their lenses with PB mounts. I have a very nice 28-200 and a 35-200 from Sigma....the other source of glass would be Tamron Adaptall with the correct mount. Again not something the high street chains would stock - but a real camera shop would. However I wonder how many Praktica owners descended on real camera shops? Cultures vary but I distinctly remember in the 80s and 90s in England....owning a Praktica of any kind lead to disdain from anyone in the business....my suspicion was always because they made less money from Pentacon products than the Japanese or West German ones. Then and now, I get photos no better or worse from a Praktica SLR compared to a Nikon SLR. Though I can accept that the Nikon is more refined, in all honesty a little mirror slap never hurt me.

Prakticar lenses were made by Meyer-Optik and CZJ in the GDR, Sigma in Japan, and the 50MM 1.4 pancake lenses were manufactured in Romania.

AgX · Aug 28, 2020

.

chuck3565 said:
the 50MM 1.4 pancake lenses were manufactured in Romania.

The Prakticar 50mm 1.4 was designed by CJZ in two Versions, both made in Germany.
The Pentacon Prakticar 50mm 1.8 was designed by Meyer, also in two versions. The later one was manufacuted by IOR in Romania as subcontractor.

brainmonster · Aug 31, 2020

I certainly "appreciate" prakticas but I've found them to be hit or miss. The first 2 I bought (different models) were DOA, and finally got lucky with a working Praktica BMS which is my main camera. I then ordered a 135mm 2.8 which had infinity focus off. Thankfully it was an easy fix. Recently the shutter speed selector dial on my BMS came "unglued" and I had to reglue it.

They just seem a little rickety. West German cameras I've made seem a little better put together and designed. The Prakticar 135mm 2.8 seems to have mixed reviews, some love it, some hate it, leading me to believe there might be QC issues. Seems on par with other FSU brands, although I'm not sure if GDR qualified technically as "FSU".

My 50mm 1.8 was made in Romania. It seems to perform OK and it's newer so a bit cleaner. I prefer it to my Helios, and a Vivitar 35mm 2.8 which I have on a Minolta.

But I don't have much else to compare it to at this point. Thankfully my BMS still works and I have no plans to buy any other cameras, since I'm happy with the results, but again I don't have any way to compare.

AgX · Aug 31, 2020

First time ever I learn of quality control issues at Pentacon, but sometime they seem to have had diffculties in obtaining rawstock in apt quality. But I remember a test in a westgerman photo-magazine on tele-lenses. And between the east and west Zeiss Sonnars, the eastern model showed better MTF.

Never seen something glued-on falling off at a Praktica,in contrast to westgerman manufacturers, where seemingly several used the same rubber cement that fails now after many decades. But no camera was designed to hold 50 years anyway.

(By the way, the "term "FSU" is always contrary used at Apug to what it means over here or at Englisch sources I know of. Here it means the countries of today that once formed the USSR.)

MattKing · Aug 31, 2020

In the days when I used to sell cameras, Prakticas were a nightmare. The models imported into Canada were of inconsistent quality. It is a retailer's nightmare if one never knows whether the camera that one sells on a Tuesday will malfunction for the customer before the week is up!

Agulliver · Aug 31, 2020

chuck3565 said:
Prakticar lenses were made by Meyer-Optik and CZJ in the GDR, Sigma in Japan, and the 50MM 1.4 pancake lenses were manufactured in Romania.

My 50/1.4 pancake clearly says "Made in Germany".

Many of the Prakticar branded lenses are also available with CZJ branding....strongly suggesting they're made by CZJ.

Regarding the B-series camera, one of my BX20S bodies is currently in for repairs. I've owned it since 1993 when it was bought for me direct from Pentacon. It's been in for repair before, after I dropped it onto a hard stone floor about 18 years ago. This time it seems to be worn out.....which is possible after I've shout many thousands photos on it. It's been my workhorse camera for 27 years - some of those years having 100 films put through it. It feels like something has stripped in the wind-on mechanism and the shutter is not cocking. I'll know more next week. My other BX20S, B100 and BCA all work perfectly with the exception that the little ring that turns the B100 on/off doesn't work any more. Maybe I've been lucky?

AgX · Aug 31, 2020

As I indicated above, Chuck must have mixed up lenses.
As I also indicated the "Prakticar " brand was used on both Zeiss and Meyer lenses.

AgX · Aug 31, 2020

Matt, thank you for that hint at lacking quality control at assembly, but as said it is the very first time I hear such. I even got no such hints from reports from within Pentacon. The only quality issues I know of are with the Prakti (designed and manufactured by the Pentacon prededessor KW in 1960). But here the problem was not quality control at the assembly line, but design and sourcing errors from the start resulting in premature failures. On which was reacted from above, by denieng it its highest quality label. A modified successor was released (after 3 years...) but failed too as the reputation of that model already was ruined.

GRHazelton · Aug 31, 2020

Interesting comments about quality control. I bought my LTL in perhaps 1975 or perhaps a bit later. It is labeled "Hanimex Praktica LTL," and has given no problems, despite heavy use for perhaps 10 years. Even now the shutter sounds good; the sharp f1.8 lens needs a CLA to free up the sticky diaphragm. Perhaps Haminex selected good examples for import?

AgX · Aug 31, 2020

The only problem I often experience with the L-series bodies (out of the wild, seemingly long time not used) are lazy shutter escapements at the slow speeds. In one case it got better after quite some releases only to then jam...

brainmonster · Aug 31, 2020

To be fair slow speeds are often sticky on many old cameras. At least it's not a leaf shutter. At least the lenses are pretty good.

AgX · Sep 1, 2020

You are perfectly right. I only wanted to say what I experienced. Which is indeed what I experience with many leave shutters too. But I have not had that many other models of SLR with a mechanical shutter in hand to compare. But the basics of an escapement should be the same.

jamesaz · Sep 1, 2020

I purchased one today. I’m not sure which model. It has a waist level finder and an odd shutter that seems to have slow and fast speeds for each marked value. I plan to run film thru it tomorrow to see if I can figure it out and if it has any light leaks. If it functions well I will probably find a place for it in my M-42 bag.

GRHazelton · Sep 1, 2020

jamesaz said:
I purchased one today. I’m not sure which model. It has a waist level finder and an odd shutter that seems to have slow and fast speeds for each marked value. I plan to run film thru it tomorrow to see if I can figure it out and if it has any light leaks. If it functions well I will probably find a place for it in my M-42 bag.

You might check Mike Butkus' Orphan Cameras for an instruction manual. Mike's site is a treasure trove.

jamesaz · Sep 1, 2020

GRHazelton said:
You might check Mike Butkus' Orphan Cameras for an instruction manual. Mike's site is a treasure trove.

Yeah, I was aware of Butkas manuals but it didn’t show up as it usually does in my searches of obsolete cameras. A little more specific search found an explanation. Examining the camera in daylight helped as well. Anyway, I ran some film thru it this morning and it doesn’t appear to leak and the shutter seems to function at the high settings (1/500-1/25). Film is drying now so I’m somewhat encouraged. It sure has some unusual attributes. Thanks for the nudge in the right direction.

chuck3565 · Sep 1, 2020

AgX said:
As I indicated above, Chuck must have mixed up lenses.
As I also indicated the "Prakticar " brand was used on both Zeiss and Meyer lenses.

Yes, I did. I have two of the Romanian lenses still factory sealed but they are in storage and I forgot they are 1.8.

AgX · Sep 1, 2020

Anyway, this shows that Meyer even got beyond their production capacity to have to outsource the manufacture of that lens.

brainmonster · Sep 1, 2020

AgX said:
Anyway, this shows that Meyer even got beyond their production capacity to have to outsource the manufacture of that lens.

Oh, I heard about the Meyer lenses being labeled "Prakticar". I didn't know they were literally Meyer lenses, I thought they were actually made by Pentacon.

Still I hear the IOR lenses are still pretty good. Mine is pretty decent. Just maybe not the prestige of having the "Made in GDR" label on it for collectors.

AgX · Sep 1, 2020

brainmonster said:
Oh, I heard about the Meyer lenses being labeled "Prakticar". I didn't know they were literally Meyer lenses, I thought they were actually made by Pentacon.

Meyer was was taken over by Pentacon (if that is the right term for procedure in a planned economy with both firms being state owned) in 1968. That was Pentacon's 2nd merger wave in which Pentacon added a further bunch of firms and in which they were upgraded to "combine", the term for highest grade of concentration. Lacking only the tiny camera production of Zeiss.
Meyer thus became a subsidiary of Pentacon and the decisions from then on were made in Dresden. In this meaning the lenses were indeed made by Pentacon. Even the brand Meyer vanished.

AgX · Sep 12, 2020

AgX said:
.

The Prakticar 50mm 1.4 was designed by CJZ in two Versions, both made in Germany.
The Pentacon Prakticar 50mm 1.8 was designed by Meyer, also in two versions. The later one was manufacuted by IOR in Romania as subcontractor.

Also the 50mm 2.4 Ernostar-type/Pancake was designed by Meyer but manufactured by IOR.

Praktica Appreciation Thread

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency