TYPICAL CAMERA USED BY WW2 PHOTOGRAPHERS?

Hello everyone.

 

I hope this question is within the topic of this forum.

 

A lot of the photographs in the book i am reading give credit to

the USNA , or other branches of the US military.

 

Could someone please tell me the type of camera commonly used

by WW2 photographers ?

 

More specifically, during and after the Normandy invasion, D-Day,

many photos were taken of landings, beach scenes etc.

 

They must have used pretty decent cameras because the photos i looked

were relatively clear with good contrast.

 

Hope this is not a stupid question!

 

Thanks.

I know military photographers were issued Speed Graphics till after the Korean War. That's what my Dad used. I'm sure they used whatever got the job done.

Probably the most famous photos from D-Day were made by Robert Capa (who later died after stepping on a land mine in Viet Nam.) He was using "several Contax cameras" at least one of which was a 35 mm Contax and a apparently a 6x6 because he took some rolls of 120 film that were ruined. As often noted, all but 11 of his images were ruined in processing ... perhaps the most famous loss of photographic history ever. But his images from the actual D-Day landing are fairly blurry (perhaps from nerves, action, or the overheating in processing.) See: http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00DdLJ . There were also a lot of Graflex Speed and Crown Graphics cameras used by military photographers (if you can imagine carrying one of those heavy beasts into the war zone) but they took (and still take) very nice sharp pictures ... which may be the ones you're seeing.

Robert Capa used a Zeiss Ikon Contax II or IIa 35mm rangefinder for his famous shots on Omaha Beach. (His archives also contained over 10,000 6x6 negs shot with his Rollei TLRs.)

Navy Officers where issued a Kodak Medalist camera ,which is a large rangefinder that shoots a 6x9 neg.They were to use the cameras to document navy life, and things like boating accidents.

<blockquote><i>They must have used pretty decent cameras because the photos i looked were relatively clear with good contrast.</i></blockquote><p>

No shit! As the others pointed out, military photographers used Graflex Speed Graphics ("Combat Graphics") or Super D Graflex <abbr title="single-lens reflex cameras">SLRs</abbr> -- these are large format cameras, if the term means anything to you. Add fine-grained film and you get stunning, sharp and detailed pictures with extreme resolution. I guess not even the most expensive digital back available today will beat such a large format negative in terms of details and "megapixels" -- to say nothing of "bokeh" and the nice, diffused look of large flash bulbs.

<p>

And of course the film wasn't processed by the local one-hour photo minilab with a bored high-school-age minimum wage worker, but by dedicated professionals with decades of experience (Capa's misfortune was caused by an excited and new lab technician... I always wonder what happened to him).

<p>

In Germany and Europe Rollei <abbr title="twin-lens reflex cameras">TLRs</abbr> and Leica and Contax 35mm rangefinders were predominant. Robot cameras were used as gun cameras, and soldiers and civilians used any mix of 35mm and medium format folders, box cameras and probably even plate cameras.

<i>Robert Capa used a Zeiss Ikon Contax II or IIa 35mm rangefinder for his famous shots on Omaha Beach. (His archives also contained over 10,000 6x6 negs shot with his Rollei TLRs.)</i>

<p>

The Contax IIa was not introduced until well after WWII, so it would have been a Contax II.

I read some books and from some of the photos, I can see that they were using Rolleifelx.

Speed Graphics were commonly used for newspaper reporter during that time.

I suspect that most processsing in WWII was done by pimple-faced GI's in the quartermaster area that might be in their late teens...

As I understand it US forces in WW II had both military photographers who used military issue still cameras such as the Kodak medallist cited above, and also embedded press photographers such as Capa, Rosenthal etc who used whatever cameras they wanted. In the case of Rosenthal's 'Raising the flag on Iwo Jima' a Speed Graphic was used while another photographer used a cine camera to film it.

 

UK forces photographers originally were issued with press cameras which they found unsuitable for combat conditions. Later they were issued with German-made Zeiss Super-Ikontas wafter a shipment had been 'liberated'.

 

There was also some 'unauthorised' photography. A couple of RAF pilots in the far east competed to get the best picures of rockets from their Beaufighter aircraft hitting their targets. The results were spectacular though I can't lay my hands on an example at present. I expect this sort of thing happened all over the place.

There was also an interesting lighter and sturdier version of the Speed Graphic, called the Combat Graphic, which eliminated bellows focusing and replaced it with a focusing mount on the lens. Seen on ebay occasionally.<P>The standard issue for cinema was the 16mm Bell and Howell.<P>The "kid" who ruined Bob Capa's D-Day photos eventually became one of the best known Life photographers (whose name somehow escapes me).<P>I believe that German WW2 photographers used Leicas and 9x12 press cameras such as the Voigtlander Avus.

Larry Burrows, was the name of the "kid", who later became the leading war photographer after Capa.

No, Rick, a 15-year-old "Dennis Banks" was responsible, and there cannot be found anything else about him on the internets.

 

So there were three kinds of photographers in WW2: Military photographers and official war correspondent (Americans: big cameras like the Medalists, Graflex and Graphics), "embedded" photo journalists (Rolleis, Leicas, Contax and similar), and soldiers and civilians taking pictures -- unofficially and often against no-photography orders (mostly contemporary amateur gear, but also high-end cameras like Leica, Rollei and Super Ikontas).

I'm not certain whether Capa used a Contax II or the III which was the metered version.<div></div>

The standard Kodak 35 (1938-1848) was also made as a Kodak PH324 in dark colors for the US Army Signal Corps. If you Google it there are a lot of references. I don't know how many were made or how they were used.

If you'd like to do some more reading on the subject, I can suggest the floowing books:

 

1) "Combat Cameraman" by Jerry Joswick and Lawrence Keating. This is mostly about movie photography with the Army Air Force. Joswick seems mostly to have used a Bell & Howell Eyemo. The rear cover on my paperback (Pyramid Press 1963) copy shows a GI in cobat gear using a Speed Graphic.

 

2) "Armed With Cameras" Peter Maslowski (Free Press 1993) Eyemos and Speed Graphics appear prominently in the photo section.

 

3) "Yankee Nomand" by David Douglas Duncan (Holt, Rinehart, & Winston, 1967). There are a couple of photographs of Duncan with what appears to be a Super Ikonta. In the Korean War and later, Duncam was well known for using a Leica.

Jezus, Mike, that old Contax is beautiful.

Ah yes, I found the reference to it on Wikipedia now. My source was "The Camera at War" by Jorge Lewinski from back in the 70s.

I stand corrected, Sir Bueh B.

I believe Robert Capa used a Leica during the Spanish civil war and went to a Contax II and Rollei in WWII then to a Contax IIa after the war. When he went to Japan, just before his fatal trip Viet Nam, he evidently was impressed with the Nikon RF and was carrying both the Contax and Nikon RF's when he was killed in 1954. I would guess that the Nikon was a gift from Nikon.

The Kodak 35 in military trim was in Kodak adverts in state side maqazines during WW2. These cameras were used for less pressing quality images. In the USA a common 116/616 or 120/620 folder was way more common than a TLR. After the warthe rumor was a zillion speed graphics and kodak 35's military cameras were crushed so the stateside camera market would not be ruined via a mess of surplus cameras. At home most non military folks used folders, Argus 35mm sometimes. Contact printing was normal. Kodacolor came out during WW2; 8 exposure 620 2x3" cameras shot 6 exposures with Kodacolor. Laler the full roll was used.

If I had to judge just by the pulitzers from the time period I'd have to say Graphics all around.

I used to work for David Lomasney, a British stringer who, after escape from German POW camp, somehow trailed MacArthur in the Pacific. David used a Speed or other Graphic that he'd had custom-built of aluminum.

 

He had to compete with MacArthur's large, personal PR staff, which included the vainglorious general's makeup artist as well as several photographers. David reported processing his own film in jungle conditions.

 

He was later captured in Burma by the Japanese (I met two of his fellow POWs in San Francisco, as well as a former OSS man who'd been tortured by the Germans in France) ... David and his POW friends joked about British vaudville in Japanese camps (think "Bridge on the River Kwai" http://history.sandiego.edu/GEN/filmnotes/bridgekwai.html )

Thanks for all of the input.

Very fascinating.

I asked in part, because l wondered how anyone

could lug some of the larger cameras around,

while in battle conditions and take photos.

Now l know.

The krauts would have been just as happy to

hit the camera guy as the paratrooper coming down l suppose.

Some of the surplus military cameras were given to other federal agencies and in the early 1960s I used both a Kodak 35 variant and the Combat Graphic (the 4x5" Speed Graphic enclosed in a wooden, OD box, with a drop down flap on the front). There was a later 70mm "Combat Graphic" camera that was another thing altogether (1953 Korean War vintage model KS-6(1)).I was taking pictures for the Smithsonian in archaeological projects in the northern Plains.

It is my understanding that most of the motion picture film shot and much of the smaller still photography was actually shot in color film and turned into B&W for newsreels, newspapers, etc. Discovery or one of the formerly historically-oriented cable channels (pre-UFO days) had a series on WWII in color that used much of this.<div></div>

From what I've read I suspect 90 percent of the photos shot by American military combat photographers and embeded press photographers in WWII were with Speed Graphics. As far as the size factors--it's all a matter of what you get used to using. Someone who really knew how to handle a 4x5 could crank out shots pretty fast even using cut film holders. They used a lot of "film packs" where you advanced to the next film sheet (thinner than cut film, by just pulling a tab. Something like 12 shots to a pack I think. There were some people packing 35mm but the film in those days was pretty grainy and slow. Plus, the 4x5 would have been a lot easier to repair in the field. 35mm really didn't get into war photography in a major way until Korean when civilian correspondents discovered Nikkor lenses. Some credit Capa and other Horace Bristol--a long time LIFE photographer--they and others all probably played a role. Even up until the early 1970s the Army still had Speed Graphics in the TOE (Table of equipment). In fact we still had one in our public information detachment after they issued us brand new Canon F1s and Made in Canada Leica M4s.