Talk:History of the single-lens reflex camera

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Photography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of photography on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhotographyWikipedia:WikiProject PhotographyTemplate:WikiProject PhotographyPhotography articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject History of photography.

Factual changes

I've made various factual changes, courtesy of information in Nihon no rekishiteki kamera / The Japanese historical camera rev. ed. (Tokyo: Nihon Kamera Hakubutsukan, 2004). This book really ought to be more widely circulated; this would help dispel the (American?) myth that the Japanese camera industry was born around 1946. -- Hoary 15:39, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Some of us Americans know better! ;) --MurderWatcher1 14:42, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pentax control layout

We read: The Asahi Pentax established the control layout used on the vast majority of SLRs in the next 30 years. . . . While little on the F was truly new, it was a well-made camera, and adhered closely to the Asahi Pentax's control scheme which was quickly becoming a de facto standard.

What's all this about? What part of the Asahi Pentax control layout was innovative or influential? (Not the thumb-wind, surely: this had been introduced to Japanese cameras by the Pigeon 35III in 1952.) Meanwhile, the Nikon F adhered pretty closely to the layout of the immediately preceding Nikon rangefinder cameras (cf the odd placing of the shutter release button). -- Hoary 15:39, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No response, so I made the changes that I thought were necessary. -- Hoary 05:57, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good changes, Hoary ...

I'm glad someone has access to better research material than I. Much of this stuff is not very well documented (at least in English-language sources I've access to) and many sources in print are simply inaccurate. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 22:22, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Adding Olympus information

When I read the History of the Single-Lens Reflex entry, I was dumbfounded that no one had seen fit to record Olympus' contributions. So I added details of the OM-1, OM-2, OM-3 and OM-4. Mention of these cameras are important because of their unprecedented influence on the overall design and direction of SLR cameras specifically and broadly.

Took out this paragraph as it was too opinionated

The phrase:

"The electronic AE SLR also killed the German camera industry when the Germans failed to keep up with the Japanese. After ailing throughout the 1960s, such famous nameplates as Contax, Exakta, Leica, Rollei and Voigtländer went bankrupt, were sold off, contracted production to East Asia or became boutique brands in the 1970s."

was taken out by me because, grammatically, you can't "kill" an industry! You might "destroy" an industry but, grammatically and technically, an industry is not a person.

Indeed, while a number of german camera makers were forced to cooperate with the japanese because of their marketing successful camera designs, understand that "Voightlander" is a brand-name that has currently been "resurrected" by Cosina and they are using that name on an excellent 35mm rangefinder camera with very fine optics that is currently selling well. Also, Leica has made the transition to digital with the M8, a digital rangefinder camera using their M-mounts lenses, continuing the manufacture of the Leica R9 SLR which can now accept a Leica-made digital back; all of this while also manufacturing lenses for the Olympus four-thirds system, which Panasonic also contributes lenses to and has manufacturing ties also with Leica.

Rollei is still manufacturing medium format SLR's and some D-SLR's with digital backs so why call them 'bankrupt'? Where is the source-information on that? Okay; Contax is now currently out of production. Understand that the camera body was being produced by Kyocera, a japanese camera manufacturer who has ceased all camera production to my knowledge. I will miss the Contax RTS, the G2 and the 645 medium format camera systems as, they were fine instruments. Now who manufactured the lenses for the Contax cameras? Zeiss-Ikon, of course, and they are now currently making a few lenses for the Nikon camera system! I never thought that would ever happen. Exakta? Exakta survived for a good while and there may still be a 'cult' following for this camera. Okay, some say that the camera looked 'crazy' or whatever, but it worked! Anything that works gets an "okay" by me. Is it out of production? Yes, I think so, but in the manufacturing world of photography, don't be surprised if someone else "resurrects" the name, just as is done with the 'Argus' name, to give just one example.--MurderWatcher1 21:02, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Restored Sentences

I have restored the two sentences, because they are true. Zeiss Ikon contracted Contax camera production to Japan (Yashica); Ihagee went bankrupt and the Exacta brand no longer exists; Leica is a boutique brand now owned by the luxury goods maker Hermes, Franke & Heidecke contracted Rolleiflex SLR production to Singapore, but went bankrupt anyway, although it managed to re-organize; and Voigtländer (company, not name) was absorbed by Zeiss Ikon. In the 1970s, when the Japanese camera industry lept forward, the Germans fell further and further behind and almost disappeared. The German camera industry is a tiny portion of the whole today, when it was almost the entire world industry in the 1930s. You may quibble with the grammar, if you wish. However, correct it, don't delete it. Paul1513 20:58, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

understand that "Voightlander" is a brand-name Not only isn't it one, it never was one. Meanwhile, "Voigtländer" is in effect used as a brand name by two companies, one of them Cosina.
Now who manufactured the lenses for the Contax cameras? Zeiss-Ikon, of course, and they are now currently making a few lenses for the Nikon camera system! Yashica (or Tomioka) and thereafter Kyocera made most of the Zeiss lenses for the Contax SLR, and Cosina makes most of the Zeiss lenses in Nikon mount (example), if not all of them. (Which one does Zeiss make?)
Exakta? Exakta survived for a good while and there may still be a 'cult' following for this camera. Exakta cameras are indeed still being used; you may wish to apply the word "cult" to this phenomenon. For that matter, Petri cameras (for example) are still being used (I put a roll through my little Color 35 a couple of months ago), but this doesn't mean that Petri isn't dead. Exakta is dead too, though the brand name is I think still occasionally applied to this or that mediocre Chinese product.
grammatically, you can't "kill" an industry! You might "destroy" an industry but, grammatically and technically, an industry is not a person. There's not the slightest grammatical error in talking of "killing an industry". (There isn't a grammatical error even in a semantically bizarre notion such as killing a film plane.) Somebody might claim that there's a lexical error, but I'm pretty sure that Google would show the claim to be mistaken. -- Hoary 23:10, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, gentlemen, (Paul1513 and Hoary), let's compromise. Minor modifications to the sentence would be as follows, and please leave your thoughts here:

"The Japanese electronic AE SLR effectively ended the German camera industry when they failed to keep up with their Japanese counterparts. After ailing throughout the 1960s, such famous nameplates as Contax, Exakta, Leica, Rollei and Voigtländer went bankrupt, were sold off, contracted production to East Asia, or became boutique brands in the 1970s."

--MurderWatcher1 16:21, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The modifications are fine by me. I don't wish to give the impression that I was trying to offend you, MurderWatcher1; I just thought the sentences were fine. You also asked about sources. If you can wait a week or two, I can post a complete bibliography for the entire SLR Chronology section. I just need to get it organized into a presentable form. Do you want to see it? It will run at least forty or fifty items. I think I can footnote each and every entry too. That will be even harder and might take a month, especially since I still haven't exactly figured out how Wikipedia does footnotes. Paul1513 18:38, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. No, I didn't feel offended by your comments, and 'yes', Paul1513 I would very much want to see this material. If you can, you can probably attach it as either a Word document or a PDF to the discussion portion of my user page. FYI, I was going to get my old photography magazines out and use those as reference/source materials myself. If you look on the Single lens reflex page, on the discussion board you'll see some discussions I've had with User:Dicklyon. By the way, in the current issue of Popular Photography, (the November 2007 issue) writer/photographer Herbert Keppler has an interesting column titled "Inside Straight" and in this issue's column (not yet online unfortunately) the title of the article is "Rating Game", subtitled "Why and how photographers went crazy testing lenses".

The article discusses the history of japanese products compared to german products, specifically Nikkor lenses versus Zeiss lenses. Very interesting mention of David Douglas Duncan. I'll put the agreed upon edit in although Hoary hasn't responded yet.--MurderWatcher1 19:05, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Added Considerable Wikipedia Links to the 'See also' section

I have added a lot of links to the 'See also' section of this 'History', however I just noticed that a number of these references are contained in Category:SLR cameras link so, if anyone feels that this work is just a duplication of effort, etc. please feel free to delete some of these entries. I just had a case of 'editing-frenzy' and didn't notice this until too late.--MurderWatcher1 20:54, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Remove Gomz Sport from Chronology?

Simonjwall has recently posted that the Gomz Sport did not come out until 1937 and therefore was most definitely NOT the first 35 mm SLR. Since this slim possibility was the Sport's only claim to fame (Simonjwall agrees that it was a technological dead end), I'm thinking that its Chronology entry should be deleted, if this stands. Any Sport defenders with contrary info? Paul1513 (talk) 21:33, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First autodiaphragm?

Järnvarg recently said that the Praktica FX2 of East Germany, 1956, is the "first camera in the world to use automatic diaphragm." This doesn't seem right, because the Graflex Super D had an autodiaphragm in 1948, and it wasn't the first camera to have one. If anyone knows for sure, please correct this point. Otherwise, I will probably delete it in a few days. Paul1513 (talk) 22:12, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have deleted the Praktica FX2 Chronology entry, because it was not the "first camera in the world to use automatic diaphragm." The Gamma Duflex was the first internal semi-auto diaphragm 35 mm SLR and the Zunow SLR was the first fully auto diaphragm 35 mm SLR.

I have also deleted the Pentacon Super (1968) entry because first 35 mm SLR with interchangeable viewfinders, TTL meter plus full viewfinder exposure control info is too conditional to be significant. It was also released in 1966. (The first full info viewfinder SLR of any type is apparently the 35 mm, external metering, leaf shutter Contaflex Super B of 1962.)

I have also deleted the Zeiss Ikon SL706 (1971) because the demise of the Germany camera industry is noted elsewhere.

I have edited the Takumar 15mm (1975) entry to explain aspherics and exclude extraneous info.

Järnvarg is correct that the Praktica Electronic (1966) is the "first camera with an electronic shutter" if he meant electronically controlled focal plane shutter. I have deleted my incorrect Contarex Electronic (1967) entry and moved the Contarex comments to Contarex (1959). Paul1513 (talk) 21:14, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have deleted 190.40.124.215's Canon EOS 5 (1992) Chronology entry "first SLR AF camera with eye control focusing." Although Eye Control Focus is technically interesting, it was never a common SLR feature adopted by other companies and therefore not significant. Canon has even dropped the feature from their digital SLRs. Paul1513 (talk) 18:03, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What does anybody think about first SLR autodiaphragm in Hasselblad 1600F in 1948? Runner1616 (talk) 11:33, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Alpa 9d and the first TTL metering camera

Someone needs to go back and fix a couple of things. The Alpa 9d was released in Europe commercially in 1963, and made it to America in 1964. Robust, it contained 3 cds cells and thru the lens metering. And most specimans that were at all cared for still work today. Thus, Pentax Spotmatic can not be the "second thru the lens metering camera" in 1964. There is the ongoing question of wether Alpa or Topcon was first in 1963. The Alpa is often overlooked due to it's generally low production numbers. 71.43.0.34 (talk) 01:38, 5 April 2008 (UTC)James Eager[reply]

I have two sources saying the Alpa 9d came out in 1964; one is specific that it was the third TTL light meter SLR, released after both the Topcon RE Super and the Asahi Pentax Spotmatic. In addition, the Alpa 9d's meter was uncoupled; a technological oddity less convenient than the RE Super and Spotmatic's coupled TTL meters that advanced upon the Zeiss Ikon Contarex's coupled non-TTL meter. Pignons' first coupled TTL meter did not arrive until the Alpa 10d in 1968. If this is wrong, please correct it and add an entry for the Alpa 6d. Just be sure to note its "out of continuity" uncoupled meter. Paul1513 (talk) 17:31, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Many sources for all Alpa information are inaccurate, at best. The 9d first appeared in Europe only, in 1963, and finally production reached large enough numbers to make it to America in 1964 thru the sole importer, Karl Heitz in New York. Your listing mentions nothing about coupled or uncoupled meters. The fact of the matter is tha the Alpa 9d meter was TTL. By your definition though, it *WAS* coupled with the aperature. The shutter was not coupled to the meter. The Alpa was unique in that there were three (not one) meter sensors in the camera (two pointed forward, one pointed at the eyepiece which was subtracted out.) So, you could also call it "partly' coupled. I saw some "automatic" cameras years later that would not let you program the Aperature to the shutter speed, yet they were "fully automatic". Finally, the Pentax Spotmatic was produced with some collaberation with the Alpa, at least via some sources. Finally, the Alpas have stood the test of time. A 9d today will work just fine, as long as you can get a battery for the meter, granted, mine was a 1966 version of the 9d. James Eager 01:09, 13 June 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mycroft 514 (talk • contribs)

Nikon FM3A and F6 in SLR chronology

I have deleted the entries for the Nikon FM3A and F6 from the 21st century section of the SLR chronology. They did not introduce any new technologies to SLR cameras and do not belong. The FM3A was especially an old technology camera. They are not even important as the last film SLRs. (They have their own Wikipedia entries as interesting cameras.) Paul1513 (talk) 18:06, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Remove Photography companies category?

I've been looking at this article and the category Photography companies doesn't apply to a history of the SLR camera. Should I remove it? I'd like to see your opinions below so we can obtain a consensus. Thanks! Mononomic (talk) 01:33, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

After 10 days with no arguments, I'm removing the category. Feel free to add it back, but at least justify why (here or on my talk page). Thank you! Mononomic (talk) 16:11, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Development section

I strongly suggest that the "development of the 35mm SLR" and "rise of the japanese SLRs sections need to be merged." There's no logical reason for the sections to be individual and it just scatters useful information and makes the article harder to read. Also, there's really no reason for Edixa to be in this section. They didn't begin making SLRs until the mid 50s, and they introduced no innovations to the type whatsoever. On the other hand there is no mention of the Praktina, Gamma Duflex, or Alpa in this section, which there should be.

Also the "general operation" section should be ahead of the development section so readers understand WHY these innovations were important.

Looking forward to hearing feedback on these suggestions. If I get none I'll go ahead and clean things up. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by K-111 (talk • contribs) 22:57, 9 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Missing the Canon F-1

Did the writer intentionally leave out Canon's F-1? It was the first camera that could have a motor added without a factory modification, the first professional camera to have an auto exposure capability, the first with a switchable viewfinder that could go from eye-level to waist-level and back, variations were the first high speed motor drive cameras (twice eclipsing nikon's efforts)... Cadillacmike (talk) 13:57, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

First successful auto diaphragm SLR.

1966 Konica Autorex (Japan; called AutoReflex in USA): first 35 mm SLR with successful shutter-priority automation (first with a focal-plane shutter).

It's not correct, because in 1965 "Arsenal" in Kiev launched "Kiev-10" with shutter priority and focal plane shutter. It had selenium (non-TTL) exposure metering, but exactly auto iris. 50 000 pieces produced during 9 years[1]. Runner1616 (talk) 06:36, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just a not to point out that the Konica Auto-Reflex (Autorex in Japan) came out in 1965, not 1966. The Kiev might still have been first, I have no knowledge of this, but the Konica was definitely introduced in 1965. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.36.6.11 (talk) 19:24, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on History of the single-lens reflex camera. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:30, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 28 external links on History of the single-lens reflex camera. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:21, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A-1 first full auto?

Ricoh 35 flex introduced in 1963 had full autoexposure, with both shutter and aperture value being set automatically, seeing how it's designed it wouldn't come to mind that it's fake full ae with shutterspeed being set manually by film sensitivity choice and aperture being chosen always in the same way in same lighting no matter what asa it's set to like Agfa Optima. It was of course leaf shutter and non interchangable lens but this doesn't change that it had full auto exposure. 46.204.50.37 (talk) 14:55, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Question on perhaps rewriting last couple of entries

This article seems to have had the vast majority of its writing occur prior to 2010, and a lot has changed since then. For instance, where it suggests that the future might have many more DSLRs with video recording capabilities seems silly in the modern perspective as this true and surpassed. There are also a couple sentences devoted to suggesting that live-view would spell the demise of DSLRs and the rise of modern Mirrorless cameras- perhaps revising and adding material to these areas would improve this article. 2600:1700:17F2:E30:E5F3:5E00:E11:6AE (talk) 22:58, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]