of the AP wesite rather than the forum. https://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/

Looks a bit familiar?

 

The FX3 had a great accessory available: the optional prism that dropped into the viewfinder and gave a fully corrected and magnified image. Have you got one of those?

 

I've just looked at the website home page and can't see this - the most prominent image is of ther latest AP '101 things to photograph in 2020' cover. Strangely, inside the magazine the articles is titled '101 things to photograph before you die'. I wonder which was the original title, and which the revised one? Perhaps AP in worrying about the age of its readership...

Also, 'Natural Wedding Photography' advertisement at the top of the page raises the question: is there such a thing as an unnatural wedding? If so, it might be an interesting subject for a Gallery picture.

 

Weird - I'm getting the Leica photo. I'll just blatantly rip it off the page and drop it in here:
.

There's another Praktica it reminds me of more, but can't find the model at the mo - with a very tall prism hump.

Andrew, I don't have an FX3, it's a pic off ebay. Early SLRs are an area where my collection is lacking - I have an Edixa Reflex with a non-return mirror, but then nothing until the Nikkormat ELW in the mid 1970s, and my only Praktica is an MTL3

 

I have two FX2s with the pentaprism and they are both working fine, the pentaprism cuts off the bottom of the frame but it works OK. I think the other Praktica you are referring to is the Praktica IV that followed the FX3 and was the same spec but with the prism permanently attached. Then came the Model V with the instant return mirror. There were a number of versions of each with different screens and the B models had built in meters. I have a number and they are still working!

 

It was the Nova series that damaged the Praktica brand. I used a few Novas and Prakticamats in the 1970s and all came to a bad end. I bought only one Super TL and it suffered a terminal case of mirror lockup before the end of the first roll! On the other hand, I could usually buy a Nova body for less than a tenner and a Prakticamat for not much more, so they were really cheap cameras (I was getting £5 - £10 per picture from the local papers at the time).

 

One thing mildly surprising about Prakticas is just how many were sold - over 1,000,000 Nova and PL Nova units, and nearly 5,000,000 L series.

 

No idea about the Novas, but the L series ones I have seem perfectly reliable.

S

 

The L series was an enormous improvement over the Nova series. The Copal Square derived shutter and a greatly improved mirror box provided a tough, reliable workhorse. It was the camera that the Nova should have been.

 

I liked the LLC immensely.

 

My first SLR was a Praktika IVb with a F2 Biotar with a semi automatic diaphagm. Oh boy did I think it was the bee-knees back in 1964. Then I discovered Pentax and bought a Pentax SV, they were worlds apart!

 

My first SLR was an Exakta RTL1000 (with large metering prism) and an F 1.8 Zeiss Pancolor lens, purchased for £50 in 1974. I had planned to spend £30 on a Zenith E and its F 2 lens, but my father considered that 'German engineering' would be more reliable than Soviet engineering, and loaned me the extra £20. The Exakta was really a Praktika with an interchangeable prism and a bayonet lens mount, and had just been discontinued so it was being sold off at a reduced price. It was big and heavy, and unlike the Zenit had a 'proper' range of shutter speeds. I later picked a couple of very cheap secondhand German lenses, and new Soligor 200 mm lens with a preset aperture, and learned a lot while using it until a friend of my father's went on a business trip to Hong Kong in 1980 and got me a new Pentax MX and 50 mm F 1.7 for about £100 (when they were still imported into the UK by Rank and sold for twice that price). The Exakta stuff was part-exchanged (I think) towards a new 24 or 28 mm lens and I've been using Pentax camera bodies ever since.

Compared to the large and heavy German camera the Pentax MX was, as you say, 'worlds apart'. I only replaced the MX in 2007 when I could no longer buy Kodachrome and got a K10 digital body (and now have a K5). But even the APC-C (half frame) DSLR bodies are massive compared to the MX which must be the ultimate 'minimalist' SLR body.

 

Meanwhile, back at the SL2...

There's a full review on that other site, complete with full size sample images. Quite impressive. Mind you, at that price...