I've been given a Hanimex Praktica TL

[carlb]

While we were at my wife’s family Xmas gathering last week my father-in-law said that he had an old SLR that he hadn’t used for years (and wasn’t going to use again) and that he would like to give it to someone who might appreciate and use it. We picked it up yesterday and it’s an old Hanimex Praktica TL with a Meyer-Optik Gorlitz Oreston 50/1.8. The lens looks like a zebra-type with zebra markings on the aperture and focussing rings. It hasn’t been used in years but was obviously looked after when he did use it back in the early 70's


Apart from a single page on a Praktica site there isn’t a lot of info about this camera, although it seems almost identical to the Super TL, and appears to be a reasonable performer. The lens also seems to be quite well regarded. Together they weigh a lot more than any other camera / lens combination I have!!

Everything seems to work properly but the battery for the meter isn’t available any more so I’ll just use my hand-held meter. I’m going to try and put a roll through it this weekend and then shoot a roll occasionally because that’s what my FIL would want.

Has anyone else used one of these and what were your thoughts?

 

[MickH]

I'm guessing that you've already seen his web page: http://www.praktica-collector.de/166_Hanimex_Praktica_TL.htm

The camera does look like the older brother of the Praktica SLR I had in the mid-seventies, mine was either the Super TL3 or MTL5, I can't quite remember which. It was a 'budget' SLR that ranked alongside the Zenit E in performance, but had better build quality.

If your Praktica TL is usable I'm sure you'll enjoy owning and shooting with it. A nice present to receive.

Cheers.

 

[chrism]

I bought a Praktica LTL in 1974 for something like £49, and it had an f1.8 50mm lens. Closed aperture metering - strange to think it was cheaper to design, build and include the linkage to close the aperture for metering than to include another resistor to allow open-aperture metering, or was that an example of being able to charge more for a cheaper product just because the idea was new? It was large, square and heavy, but I remember it performed OK on the few films I could afford in those days (FP4 and HP4 in Paterson Acutol). I had a Hanimex 135 at some stage for it. It was traded for a K1000 in 1976.

Chris

 

[Turves]

Well there are plenty of lenses around for these cameras, some good some bad, but all fun to try out. I hope it works ok.
There is a history around on the net of the Hanimex 'brand' or rebrand.
The guy imported a variety of cameras, lenses and accessories into Australia from East Germany and Japan.

 

[David Hughes]

They were cheap which affects a lot of people's opinion but I've always liked them for the simple reason that they were designed by photographers and slightly old fashioned when everyone else was trying to be modern.

And they were virtually hand made with all components made in house. So still repairable - unlike a lot of no longer all singing and all dancing plastic and electronic stuff.

A lot of people like the Tessars fitted to them and the 30mm Lydiths and the f/2·8 135mm lenses still command a high price. Think of them as a post war Zeiss or Contax and you might understand. Also one or two model were very advanced for their time.

From memory they were a match needle camera and a Wein cell ought to get the meter working again. It needed a PX675 - perhaps. I've one or two still in the collection and like them a lot.

When you get your prints or slides back you'll be able to tell us, I hope, that they are more than adequate.

Regards, David

 

[Brian Levy]

They get a bad rep. I used to shoot with a guy who had a Practika system and it easily rivaled the Nikons in the group with slide film.

 

[Vilk]

...it easily rivaled the Nikons in the group with slide film.

I don't believe there are mediocre cameras, only mediocre photographers.

🙄

 

[paulfish4570]

you got an excellent lens in the Oreston 50/1.8.
the praktica's viewfinder is dim compared to many of other M42-mount bodies, but if the speeds are on, go shoot photos. that oreston focuses close, and gives a beautiful, smooth, swirly OOF plane. good m42 bodies (think spotmatic)with brighter viewfinders are inexpensive, fixable, and readily available.

 

[Tom hicks]

Carl I bought a mint condition Praktica L ( http://www.praktica-collector.de/169_Praktica_L.htm ) at a garage sale for 20 dollars. At the time I thought I paid to much . It has worked flawlessly for the past 3 years . Here are the first shots I put through it . Walgreens 200 speed film , all flashed shots with a Vivitar 285HV. 50mm lens. Enjoy it they work fine .

tom

 

[carlb]

Thanks for the replies. I had hoped to shoot some pictures over the weekend but it was just too hot to go outside - this weekend should be a bit cooler so with a bit of planning I might get a chance.

From what Paul said I should be able to use the lens on any other M42 body such as a Spotmatic etc - is that correct? Sorry for the M42 newbie question - I've never owned or used a screw-mount camera before.

 

[pschauss]

Most likely your camera's light meter uses a bridge circuit in which case you can use any silver oxide or alkaline battery which will fit. I use a 625A in my Praktica MTL3 and the light meter agrees with my VC meter.

 

[paulfish4570]

yes, you may use the oreston many manual m42 bodies. i used mine on a pentax sp1000, and praktica. it protruded too deeply into my fujica st605 bodies to use on them.
for all sorts of manual focus info, you might check www.mflenmses.com. a wealth of m42 info there ...