Five Famous Photographers and the Cameras They Used

Five Famous Photographers and the Cameras They Used

1280 720 Josh Solomon

It’s no secret that we love our gear here at Casual Photophile. A quick glance through the archives is enough to illustrate our undying love for classic cameras, but while our addiction to the tools of the trade is incurable we’re ever aware that cameras are only incidental to the creation of a great photograph. It’s the mind of the photographer that really creates the photograph; cameras are only a tool in the process.

But every now and then the stars align to pair certain human beings with their perfect tool. History is full of these serendipitous unions between man and machine; Jimi Hendrix revolutionized guitar playing with the Fender Stratocaster, Ayrton Senna conquered Formula One with the McLaren MP4/4, and Marty McFly defied time and space with the DeLorean. It’s no different in photography, a field in which the tool is so closely married to the work produced, and there’s no shortage of fruitful pairings between legendary photographers and their machines.

To pay homage to these cameras and their photographers, we’ve decided to compile a list. Here are five amazing cameras and the photographers that used them to make some of the most famous photographs in history.

[All image sources linked through images]

Famous photographers and their cameras 006

Leica M3 / Henri Cartier-Bresson

We’ll start this list off with the most famous camera of them all, Leica’s M3, the chosen tool of the French master and pioneer of street photography, Henri Cartier-Bresson. The camera and the man have become nearly synonymous in the sixty-odd years since they’d have first met. When one thinks of Leica, one inevitably conjures visions of the immaculately composed photographs of Henri Cartier-Bresson, and when we pick up an M3 we can immediately see the way the master saw.

Cartier-Bresson famously referred to the Leica M3 paired with a 50mm lens as an extension of his eye. As pretentious and full of you-know-what as that may sound today, Henri actually has a point. Rangefinder cameras show the shooter the entire scene as the eye would normally see it, bright and in-focus. SLRs by comparison only focus on a particular subject and blur out whatever isn’t in focus. Though we can use the handy depth-of-field preview lever found on many SLRs to achieve a similar effect, it unfortunately results in a greatly dimmed viewfinder which could create a problem composing in low light situations- not ideal.

SPAIN. Andalucia. Seville. 1933.

Cartier-Bresson took advantage of this characteristic of the M3 to great effect. You can see the meticulous craft of his compositions as subjects big, small, near, and far are positioned perfectly across the entire frame, all the way up to the very edge of the image in some cases. While these compositions are certainly possible on an SLR, they present themselves more obviously in a rangefinder camera, and can be more easily executed using one.

Will having a Leica M3 make you into a regular Henri Cartier-Bresson? Of course not. But if you absolutely love rangefinder-style shooting, there’s scarcely a camera that can beat the M3. Get one here.

Famous photographers and their cameras 003

Nikon FM2 / Steve McCurry

Everybody knows that one National Geographic photo. You know, the one with the eyes. Yeah, that one. The photo that would firmly ensconce McCurry at the forefront of photography was taken with a Nikon FM2. But wait, isn’t the FM2 an amateur body? Why would a professional, let alone one of National Geographic‘s most accomplished shooters use an amateur body? The answer is this- the FM2 punches far above its weight.

Though the FM2 was marketed to capitalize on the lucrative advanced enthusiast market of the 1980s, it also served double duty as a light mechanical backup body for many pro photographers. And in spite of its amateur origins, the FM2 shares the self-same ruggedness and reliability of Nikon’s legendary F-series of cameras. As a result, many photojournalists who didn’t need the excessive modularity or wanted to avoid the hefty bulk of the F-series picked the FM2 as a simple, no-nonsense, bare-bones photographic tool.

Steve McCurry happens to belong to such a camp, and just as Henri Cartier-Bresson took advantage of the Leica M3’s rangefinder format, Steve McCurry took advantage of the FM2’s SLR format. His documentary-style portraiture lends itself well to the specific abilities of SLRs, and the harsh environs of globetrotting photojournalism almost certainly called for the rugged reliability of a Nikon.

Famous photographers and their cameras 004

The specific camera, lens, and film used to make his most famous portrait, Afghan Girl, is the Nikon FM2 paired with the Nikkor 105mm f/2.5 AIs (read our review here), exposing on the sorely missed Kodachrome 64. The ability to see exactly what we’re getting with an SLR makes critical framing easier, and because the viewfinder magnification changes along with the lens’s focal length, it makes framing the odd focal length of Nikon’s 105mm much faster than on a frameline-restricted rangefinder.

So here we have a camera ready for anything, a legendary lens, a classic film emulsion, and a master photographer. It was a perfect storm of photographer and gear, and it resulted in the 20th century’s Mona Lisa. Get your own FM2 here.

Famous photographers and their cameras 0010

Graflex Speed Graphic / Weegee

If Henri Cartier-Bresson and Steve McCurry depicted the intrinsic beauty of the world, then Arthur Fellig (better known as Weegee) captured the squalid ugliness of it. Weegee was the original crime-scene nightcrawler, but was scarcely the gaunt Jake Gyllenhaal type. Instead, he was a stout, cigar-puffing, flashbulb-armed, 1940’s, New York City press photographer. Imagine Danny DeVito in L.A. Confidential and you’ve pretty clearly got the idea.

Weegee’s window into the seedy world of Manhattan’s Lower East Side was through the viewfinder of an enormous 4 x 5 Graflex Speed Graphic. The Speed Graphic was standard issue to press photographers of the era because of its use of extremely high-resolution 4 x 5 negatives, which were necessary to compensate for the primitive newspaper printing technology of the ’40s.

The enormous negative also offered a curious advantage to Weegee’s time-sensitive freelance photography- instant printing. Weegee was famously known for arriving at the scene of a crime before police. This allowed him to capture crime scenes at their juiciest, and by employing a makeshift darkroom in the trunk of his car, Weegee was often able to develope his negatives and make contact-prints before police had even finished cordoning off the crime scene. The enormous 4 x 5 negative eliminated the need for an enlarger, and therefore he could sell ready-made prints to any newspaper willing to pay.

Famous photographers and their cameras 0011

Weegee and his Speed Graphic set a standard for press and freelance photography and established a style that still lives in every flash-illuminated urban portrait. And though it’s bulky and impractical today, the Speed Graphic will forever be the symbol of the press photographer and the nightcrawlers who used them. Join their ranks with your own Graflex.

Famous photographers and their cameras 007

Rolleiflex TLR / Diane Arbus and Vivian Maier

Photography eventually evolved from the bulky 4 x 5 press camera to the more portable medium format TLR. The most famous of these cameras is the German Art Deco masterpiece, the Rolleiflex. The square format of the 6×6 TLR combined with the beautiful lenses commissioned by Rollei for the Rolleiflex 3.5 and 2.8 made for a portraitist’s dream machine. One photographer who took advantage of this penchant for portraits was Diane Arbus, a photographer who documented the lives of the social outcasts of the 1950s and 1960s.

Diane Arbus often preferred the Rolleiflex Wide variant of the Rolleiflex, equipped with a 55mm f/4 Zeiss lens in order to magnify the sense of unease so prevalent in her portraits. Her usage of the Rollei Wide along with the normal-lensed Rolleiflexes (and later Mamiya TLRs with their interchangeable lenses) helped reveal the plights of the underprivileged and marginalized through the expressions of their faces, expressions weathered by lifetimes of struggle and survival.

Although well-suited for portraiture, Rolleiflexes also exceled in the art of street photography. Enter Vivian Maier, a nanny-turned-street-photographer active throughout the latter half of the 20th century. Maier never set out to become a professional; she didn’t even go as far as publishing her photographs during her lifetime. But with the now famous rediscovery of her portfolio, we find a photographer obsessed with the documentation of her life and her environment all facilitated by Maier’s trusty Rolleiflex.

Famous photographers and their cameras 001

The Rolleiflex made perfect sense for a photographer like Vivian Maier. Its low profile and whisper-quiet operation meshed perfectly with Vivian’s reported desire to remain incognito, resulting in photos which often found subjects bemused and intrigued but always in their natural state. The result was a collection of candid street scenes and portraits executed with earnest charm and a real compassion for the subject, a perfect expression of both Vivian Maier’s vision and the unique charm of a Rolleiflex TLR.

Famous photographers and their cameras 005

Minolta SRT-101 / W. Eugene Smith and Annie Leibovitz

Finally, we have a camera of humble birth, the Minolta SRT-101. These cameras are a dime-a-dozen these days, and are considered unspectacular to many, which may lead to doubt about its ability to produce world-class images. But if we asked a seasoned professional, say, somebody like Annie Leibovitz or W. Eugene Smith, we’d get a decidedly different take.

The Minolta SRT-101 happens to be the camera that made world-renowned portraitist Annie Leibovitz fall in love with photography. According to her book At Work, she bought the SRT-101 while in Japan as her first “serious camera” and took it up the face of Mount Fuji for its first assignment. The rest, as they say, is history. And though she doesn’t use the SRT-101 today, it sparked a love of photography that’s resulted in some of the greatest portraits of the 20th and 21st centuries. But does this mean that the SRT-101 is just a gateway to bigger and better things? Not necessarily.

We’ve long held that Minolta doesn’t get the amount of respect it deserves, and nowhere is that more evident than in master photographer W. Eugene Smith’s landmark work on Minamata disease. Eugene Smith and his wife Aileen took it upon themselves to give a voice to the mercury-poisoned community of Minamata, Japan, and what resulted was one of the most powerful collections of photographs ever made. The photographs in this essay are stark, striking, and devastatingly beautiful, and one would assume that only a perfectionist with some kind of super-camera could have taken them. But as super as the SRT is, Smith was that and more.

Famous photographers and their cameras 009

Even though he was an unceasing perfectionist in his craft, due to his constant financial troubles Smith was known for using whatever camera happened to be lying around. In light of this, the Minolta Camera Company threw their support behind the financially troubled photographer while he was working to document the Minamata story. In exchange for TV ad appearances, Minolta gave Smith funding along with some cameras and lenses, the SRT-101 being among them. Smith then took the SRT-101 and coupled it with the Minolta 16mm f/2.8 fisheye lens (our review here) to capture the distorted world of Minamata, a community destroyed as much by mercury poisoning as by corporate greed. The resulting photo essay (which was sadly Smith’s last) has since become a landmark work for both photography and environmental activism, and is still celebrated and admired to this day. See what he saw, through your own Minolta SRT.

Famous photographers and their cameras 002

But the fact that these photographers used these cameras is secondary to the sheer quality of their entire bodies of work. The incredible consistency across many decades of the medium is a testament to the talent behind the gear. These master artists accomplished exactly what they strived to accomplish; they made us focus on the message rather than the medium.

And really, that’s the moral of the story here. Of course it’s important to choose the right tool for the job, and indeed all of the photographers on our list did this beautifully. But even if you don’t have your dream camera, use whichever one you have to its absolute fullest and focus on your craft. Who knows, maybe someday you and your camera will carry each other to the dizzying artistic heights we’ve touched upon here. Hey, we can all dream, can’t we?

Find your perfect camera at our own F Stop Cameras, or…

Shop B&H Photo

Follow Casual Photophile on Facebook and Instagram

[Some of the links in this article will direct users to our affiliates at B&H Photo, Amazon, and eBay. By purchasing anything using these links, Casual Photophile may receive a small commission at no additional charge to you. This helps Casual Photophile produce the content we produce. Many thanks for your support.]

Josh Solomon

Josh Solomon is a freelance writer and touring bassist living in Los Angeles. He has an affinity for all things analog. When not onstage, you can find him roaming around Southern California shooting film and humming a tune.

All stories by:Josh Solomon
  • Randle P. McMurphy July 12, 2016 at 12:58 pm

    Dear James,
    it always makes me smile reading some articles like that (don´t get me wrong)
    because there is always something mystics sprayed around it……haha
    Just belive me if H.C.B. would have had the choice between the Leica III with only a 50mm lens
    he nearly could afford and a cheap digital camera incl. vario lens what do you think would he pick ?
    Most of thie “famous” photographers were also very bad printers so I really think they would have been
    verry grateful for get rid of that for using a tool like photoshop (don´t kill me now)……..haha

    We all love our old Nikons, Canons, Minoltas and Hasselblads but remember these photographers
    had to “work” with what was avaiable and were not free to choose like we are for our own fun.

    • You’re right, of course! This is more an exercise to highlight cameras for people to hunt out. Someone who is a massive Annie fan might just feel something if they’re able to get their hands on her first favorite camera. 🙂 Just another small way to enjoy this hobby.

      • Randle P. McMurphy July 13, 2016 at 9:53 am

        You make me smile again James,
        we take pictures to catch moments and while doing it we
        also remember the joy we have using our equipment…….

        • “incl. vario lens” I think Henry would pick the 50mm anyway. You don’t change a bicycle for a motorbike if wanna race de tour de france.

    • My 2¢ but I reckon HCB would still be shooting a film Leica today (M6, M7…). Or maybe a Sony A7R II, but I bet he wouldn’t like the EVF even though it’s pretty spectacular.

      Also just being nitpicky but his photo above was shot in the thirties, so with a Leica III, not an M. I read somewhere Mr. Bresson got the very first Leica (the I), nobody at the time knew what Leica was — let alone 35mm photography 😉

      • H C-B bought his first Leica, a chrome 1A in 1932. It had been made in 1929. The 50mm F3.5 lens is fixed. Removal lenses came with the Standard in 1931. My partner bought me a black one, made 1930, for my birthday last month. I’ve had to start estimating distances. So, 10 metres is 30 feet or the length of two Rover 75 cars. It has no strap lugs so I use it in the leather case that came with the 111 I bought in 2007. My 111 was made in 1935. These cameras are very discreet in use, perfect for ‘street’ as you can conceal it in your hand.

    • It’s not so much that they were “very bad printer”, but that in those days there were some very good printers who where highly skilled in the darkroom and knew exactly how to maximise an image by dodging and burning, adjusting grain, etc. Photographers were able to focus there energies on being in the right place at the right time and taking great pictures. They left the technical details upto the developers. I’m not so sure that they would be happier with digital. With digital you have to spend a lot of time in post production. In fact most of the great photographers of today leave the digital editing to a specialists. Certainly the great photographers of the film era who have moved to digital don’t do their own post-processing (eg, Salgao, McCurry, Moriyama. etc). So it’s not quite as simple to say that HCB would prefer a cheap digital point and shoot to a Lieca IIIc. He would probably prefer a digital Leica M (as many of the ex film leica photographers do: eg Ralph Gibson)

  • Great article as usual James, a name or two I wasn’t expecting to see here as well.

    • Josh penned this one, my friend, so thanks go to him! But I’m glad you liked it anyway. I’m sure we’ll revisit this- there are too many amazing photogs.

    • Randle P. McMurphy December 7, 2016 at 3:36 am

      Fame is a very strange thing if you look at it a different way.
      Paris Hilton is famous too right ? But a lot of people really don´t know the reason why.
      Maybe just because a lot of us know her name from being on nearly any page of the “Yellow Press” ?

      So sometimes I feel this happens to some photographers too,
      it´s not the work that make us remember – it´s just we know their names
      because almost everybody repeats them again and again like one of the
      napalese prayers mills……

  • “Hey you know, I’m a war photographer so I use a Nikon FM because it’s entirely mechanical and won’t run out of batteries.” *proceeds to bolting on an MD-12*

    OK people I was only trying to make a funny photographer joke. I’m not saying the FM isn’t a great choice (but why not a F2 though 😉 )

    Cool article!

  • Diane Arbus- she used most of the time Mamiya’s C220 / C330, as far as I know.

  • Diane Arbus shot 35mm for her first couple of years, then went to the Rolleiflex as she got bolder. Almost all of her celebrated images are with the Rollei.
    Although the Mamiyas are nice, and I did love mine, (except for the TLR parallax), Maier and Arbus used Rolleis. 🙂

    • Federico,
      That is simply not historically accurate. Arbus did indeed shoot with Rolleiflexes, but later used Mamiya TLRs. I write this as Rolleiflex owner and confirmed fan of the brand, but this should never get in the way of facts. Don’t take my word for it, though—there is enough information out there on the web and in various books about her to confirm my comments.

    • She did use a Rolleiflex–for a while. But some of her best-known images, as Brett says, were actually made with the Mamiya. If you Google “Diane Arbus Mamiya” you’ll find several images of her with her Mamiya TLR.

  • Sorry guys but I believe Diane Arbus was a lover of the Mamiya C220/330.

  • A camera like the Minolta SRT 101 is acclaimed when new and in popular use. Later, when people and models move on, they are forgotten, put away etc. Then, in today’s age of rediscovery, they are hunted out, put on eBay and classic camera dealers lists as VINTAGE!

  • nice piece. imo the greatest picmakers surfaced during the 1950’s,60’s. published in leica photography magazine, toni schnieders, cornelius, plus maybe a dozen others.

    undubtedly supported by leitz,for equipment agfa,adox,perutz etc.for film,chemicals, maybe. the freashness of their images remain preserved in the beautiful, hand-cut litho plates created.
    in his book, ‘leica and the leica ystem’, theo. m. scheerer, is another hero of mine. I admired the large.format photos in the linhof-backed magazine ‘grossbild technik, too.

    there is no better teacher than viewing the best efforts of such photographers, imo. they all inspired me. I’ve enjoyed nearly 40 years of this interesting hobby, thanks to them. I would like to know more about hem. schneiders went into painting, for instance. sheerer passed in an accident in the north sea, I heard. not sure.

    re techniques, equipment, I am sure they would all embrace current developments. moving from leica M film cameras to experimentation first with a contax digital TVS , now sony A7II, has perked up my enthusiasm, for the decisive moment.

  • I bought a Rolleiflex in 1984 for £49. On a trip to York (GB) same year I popped into a traditional photography shop for film and the old guy in there said my camera was the “Old Standard” of circa 1933! I always used E6 in that camera and made 6 X 6 slides, big enough to hold up to the light, though I later bought a simple illuminated viewer. By 2007 the shutter gave trouble so I part-exchanged it for a Hasselblad 500CM with 80mm f2.8 Planar, strap, erc and correct lens hood. I later bought another A12 back so with a roll in my shirt pocket I have 36 exposures. Still using E6 Fuji 100 iso. Cannot see much difference between modern shots and older ones. A legacy in 2007 allowed my to buy a pair of Leica M3 bodies. I did a lot of research into the M series. I decided that if I had M3, I could buy the spectacles 35mm f2.8 Summaron as well as the 50/90 and 135mm lenses. Four in all. That’s what I did. The spectacles 35mm works very well in reducing the 50mm frame, always present in the viewfinder) to a 35mm. It does darken the image slightly and I thought of this when reading a remark above about stopping down a lens on an SLR. My partner bought me a Leica 1A, 1930 black camera for my birthday this year. Unlike later bodies, 1931 onwards, the lens on this first production model (1925-31) is affixed.

  • No Diane Arbus did not use Rolleiflex, she used a two-eyed Mamiya c330

    • You’re right that she used Mamiyas, definitely. But it’s also very well-documented that when she moved from 35mm to TLRs she first used Rolleis. Maybe we can do a “Part Two” of this article and add in the Mamiya (and some others that we didn’t touch on here).

  • Knut-Inge Johnsen May 23, 2019 at 3:32 am

    In his old days, H C-B also used a black Leica Minilux.

  • Knut-Inge Johnsen May 23, 2019 at 3:34 am

    In his old days, H C-B also used a black Leica Minilux.

    • In his old age, H C-B also used a black Leica Minilux. I’ve seen pictures of him holding this. However, most of the pictures of him seen by me are of him holding the M3. Given his fondness for the 50mm lens, this is the one M that would suit him down to the ground. The 3 in M3 refers to the 3 frames in the finder: 50, 90, 135mm. The 50 is constant, it surrounds the inside of the finder with almost nothing showing outside it. For users of 50mm focal length, the M3 is by far the best body to choose. Many opine, as is often the case, that the M3 was the best built of all the M3 series, later models suffered from cost-cutting by Leitz. Perhaps the few MP models (402 some sources) made 1956-7 were made to the same standards as the M3 from which it was derived. Pre M5, perhaps the M4 was made to a good standard. Post 1977 and the Canadian trio are said to be decidedly inferior. The M6 is an M4-P with a meter. The M7 is most unLeicalike with its electronic shutter. Digital? Not for me. Would forget to plug it into the mains at bedtime.

  • The M4 is a very good camera, I read that Jon Luvelli still uses it on a daily basis with his M10 Mono. I have been interested in picking one up in good condition, scouring ebay for the right one.

  • Jane Bown and Olympus OM-1.

  • Garry Winogrand and his legendarily worn Leica M4.

  • HCB and his camera(s). Huh. Talk about opening a can of worms.

    According to his French biographer, Cartier-Bresson was prone to peddling the story of his poverty but in fact he had the financial resources of his supremely wealthy family to fall back on.

    While he used the 50mm Elmar almost all the time, it is also documented (by the same biographer) that he had a 35mm and a 90mm lens. In the 1950s he shot color for American and European magazines with a larger format camera, I’m overseas just now and I don’t have access to the bio book but I believe it was either a 6×7 or a 6×9. He did go on record as saying he didn’t think much of color or of using any camera other than Leicas, but he did.

    Also do not forget that in 1932 when he bought his first Leica, that camera cost the equivalent of an ordinary working man’s entire yearly salary.

    Photos in the bio show him using a iiif or a iiig, an M3 and, in one photo of him taken in his very old age, a small P&S type Leica.

    No doubt if he had made it to the digital age, he would now he shooting with an M10 or an M11. And a Summicron 50.

    I harbor a sly secret (well, now no longer) thought that in one of his packs he would have had a Leica Q2…

    Excellent article, this. As always.

    Best regards from DANN

Leave a Reply

Josh Solomon

Josh Solomon is a freelance writer and touring bassist living in Los Angeles. He has an affinity for all things analog. When not onstage, you can find him roaming around Southern California shooting film and humming a tune.

All stories by:Josh Solomon