Canon FT QL

Most of my old SLRs are from the 1970s and early 1980s and, as such, offer full through-the-lens metering and often aperture-priority autoexposure. I wanted to get grittier, more elemental, more raw. So I started scanning the auctions for SLRs from the 1960s. Not only are these beasts bigger and heavier than those that came later, they also lack some of the niceties we’ve come to take for granted. This camera has one nod to convenience: a coupled light meter, center-weighted, that meters through the lens.

Canon FT QL

That was a big deal in 1966, when the FT QL was introduced. Competitor Pentax blazed that trail in 1964 with its seminal Spotmatic, and all the other SLR makers rushed to keep up. But on these older cameras you had to stop down to activate the meter.


On most stop-down SLRs, you activate the meter by by moving a lever. On the FT QL, that’s the big lever right next to the lens – but before you use it, be sure to twist the ring on the lens marked with A (aperture) and M (manual) to A. When you move the lever, the camera activates (stops down to) the lens’s selected aperture. This dims the view and activates a needle inside the viewfinder. You set aperture and shutter speed such that the needle points at a “good exposure” mark. This snippet from the FT QL manual shows that mark is a circle, and that when exposure is good the needle is inside the circle. Bear in mind that this is a center-weighted meter, meaning that it meters the light at the center of your frame. More modern meters read several points of light in the frame and do a little math to figure out the best exposure.

If your frame of reference is automatic everything on a camera, or even easy aperture-priority shooting (as it is for me), the stop-down process feels so slow. But in the mid-1960s, it was a big deal because it sped up shooting. And when you got to shooting, the FT QL was a well-specified camera and a fine choice. Its cloth shutter operated from 1/1000 to 1 second, and could sync with an electronic flash at 1/60 sec. You could also lock the mirror in the up position, which was necessary when using wide-angle lenses which intruded deeply inside the camera body.

Canon FT QL

The FT QL features Canon’s FL lens mount, which had been introduced a couple years earlier. New FT QLs could be had with 50mm lenses at either f/1.8 or f/1.4. My FT QL came with the 50mm f/1.8 lens.

By the way, if you like Canon SLRs check out my reviews of the AE-1 Program (here), the T70 (here), the TLb (here), the EOS 650 (here), and the EOS A2e (here). You might also like the Canon Dial 35-2 (here) or the AF35ML (here). Or check out all my camera reviews here.

The QL in the FT QL’s name stands for Canon’s Quick Load system. You lay the film’s leader across the camera until it reaches a red mark on the body, and close the door. There’s no pesky threading of the film into the takeup spool. Unfortunately, I seem to be incapable of using this system properly. Just as I screwed it up on my Quick-Load-equipped Canonet QL17 G-III, I screwed it up here, too. I dropped in a 24-exposure roll of film and clicked away happily, not knowing that the film wasn’t advancing. I figured it out when I noticed that the frame counter atop the camera read 30. Argh!

I pulled the film out a little farther, shut the door, and felt a little more resistance when I pulled the winder. Success! And so I got busy shooting, using good old Fujicolor 200. I’d also dropped in a Wein cell 625 battery to power the meter.

After I got the film wound right and shot a few photos I took the lens off the camera to look it over. I’m glad I did, because I found a hazy fungus creeping across one of the elements. Poor little thing. The photo below is from when I was about to go on eBay to find a replacement lens. Another f/1.8 appeared in my mailbox about a week later for about $20 shipped. FD-mount Canon primes can be a real bargain.

Computer and TV

I made a couple of trips to the Indianapolis Museum of Art with the FT QL. The first trip happened before I discovered the fungus on the lens. This photo doesn’t seem to suffer any, though. I even got a little bokeh here, and it’s pretty pleasing.


I could not catch a sunny day while testing this camera. I wish I had shot ISO 400 or 800 film to get better depth of field, as over and over again my in-focus patch was shallow.

Shaded house

But what mood this lens captured! You can almost feel the gloom in these photographs.

At Sycamore Row

The photos above and below are from Sycamore Row on the old Michigan Road. I had reason to be out there early one morning while I had the FT QL with me. This original alignment is lined with sycamore trees. This section of state highway was bypassed and abandoned in the 1980s, much to the relief of drivers, who reported harrowing experiences in here encountering oncoming trucks. Read more about it here.

Sycamore Row

Sadly, this camera’s shutter is faulty.

Shutter problem!

As usual, I made some photos around my yard. I could have the most-photographed house in Indianapolis.


The lens did credible work up close.


To see more from this roll, check out my Canon FT QL gallery on Flickr.

I found this camera cumbersome to use, in large part because of its stop-down metering. I don’t enjoy doing it on Pentax Spotmatics either. I might enjoy this camera a lot more, however, after a CLA, as the controls all felt sluggish.

Still, shooting the FT QL brought me plenty of zen moments as I had to take my time to get the exposure right. It reminded me of using my Yashica-D recently – the time it took to frame, meter, set exposure, and finally press the shutter button gave me a moment to take in the sounds, smells, and scenes around me. Cameras with less automation simply give you a moment to connect with your surroundings. I’m not likely soon to forget the few minutes I spent at Sycamore Row, for example – the morning air was cool and damp and a few birds chirped and fluttered among the trees. Any time photography can help me connect with my world, it’s a great thing.

If you like old film cameras, check out all of my reviews here!
To get Down the Road in your inbox or feed reader, subscribe here.


27 responses to “Canon FT QL”

  1. Richard Avatar


    I own a Canon FTb QL and it’s wonderful:

    In 1971 my Canon FTb QL replaced your Canon FT QL. My camera is your camera’s younger brother.

    I found my Canon FTb QL for $15 in a Chicago thrift store. It’s a joy to shoot.

    I suspect our two cameras will be working a decade or so after our digital cameras fall apart. Thanks as always for your blog.

    1. Jim Grey Avatar

      $15 is a steal! That’s the kind of price I would rather have paid! I’m hoping to get better results the next time I use my FT.

  2. pesoto74 Avatar

    I have the FTB and right now it is one of my main cameras. I think the main difference between the FT and the FTB is the lens mount. I wonder if you FL 50 f/1.8 is a different design than the one they used on the FD version. I have found that one to be pretty good wide-open.

    1. Jim Grey Avatar

      The kinds of challenges I was getting with this lens make me wonder: was it attached properly to the camera? was the lens damaged in some non-visible way? Because I’ve never had a big-name lens that didn’t work good enough wide open and flawlessly at every f/stop below wide open.

  3. RAM Avatar

    It’a easy to find a cheap but fungus-free lens in excellent condition to replace yours. It can be FL or FD (the latter an old breechlock mount or new mount).

    1. Jim Grey Avatar

      That’s exactly what I did – picked one up on eBay for not that much money.

  4. unavowedhousewife Avatar

    Just grabbed this camera with a mix of Canon lenses on ebay. Thanks for the write up! I’m excited to get it in the mail soon :) I also really agree with your point about feeling ‘zen like’ when you use an older camera. I try to explain that to people when they ask why I like shooting film and trying out all these old cameras. It also teaches me to be patient and to really think about composition of a photo. Really great info! Thanks again!

    1. Jim Grey Avatar

      That’s for sure – these old manual cameras slow you down and give you space to think through your composition. I can’t tell you how many wasted shots I get with my digital camera because I don’t think! Good luck with your FT QL.

  5. Bob Avatar

    Is there a digital camera body that will accept the lens from my old canon FT QL? I have a 1.2, a wide angle, and a 85-205 mm zoom. My cloth shutter has several pin holes in it and I get light spots.

    1. Jim Grey Avatar

      No DSR takes these lenses natively, but you can buy adapters for pretty much any major DSLR brand. Go to Amazon and search for “Canon FL lens mount adapter” and you’ll see. Bear in mind that your lenses will have a different apparent focal length than you are used to because the DSLR’s sensor is smaller than a frame of 35mm film. What I gather is that a 50mm lens is effectively a 75mm lens on a typical DSLR. Even with these adapters, I gather that these older lenses aren’t entirely plug and play. Honestly, if you want to shoot with your Canon lenses, I’d go look for a new compatible body on eBay. If you want a DSLR, go buy one and get new lenses for it.

  6. James Taylor Avatar

    — you wrote:

    Honestly, if you want to shoot with your Canon lenses, I’d go look for a new compatible body on eBay. If you want a DSLR, go buy one and get new lenses for it.

    — end of quote:

    i too have an FT QL with 58mm f/1.2, a 28mm wide angle, and a 400mm telephoto

    what’s a “compatible body” for these lenses?

    1. Jim Grey Avatar

      Your lenses are compatible with Canon FL-mount camera bodies. It turns out the list of those is short: Canon FX (1964), Canon FP (1964), Canon Pellix (1965), Canon FT QL (1966), Canon Pellix QL (1966), and Canon TL (1968). There might be adapters available for you to shoot those lenses on any number of other cameras, too. I see one on Amazon that lets you shoot FL lenses on EOS bodies.

  7. James Taylor Avatar
    James Taylor

    Thanks, Jim.

    — my FT QL body is still OK, and can be used with film

    re going Digital

    do you think it’s _worth it_ to get and adapter and an EOS body (on ebay? elsewhere?)

    if so, is there a chart that shows compatible or best choice EOS bodies for these lenses?

    i was advised that the Nikon D3100 and Canon EOS Rebel T3 were good choices if i wanted to move into the Digital SLR world

    right now i take all my photos with my iPhone 5s :-) i love conveneience & portability

    1. Jim Grey Avatar

      My advice remains: if you want to shoot a digital SLR, invest in lenses designed for it. If you want to shoot the lenses you have for your film SLR, just use that film SLR. You can buy adapters to make your film SLR lenses work on most digital SLRs, but I wouldn’t bother. It is probably more hassle than it is worth. Your DSLR won’t be able to autofocus those lenses, and might need to be metered in stop-down mode — a pain in the neck, both.

      1. James Taylor Avatar
        James Taylor

        I’ll get a digital SLR — do you have any recommendations re the Nikon D3100, Canon EOS Rebel T3 or other under $600?

        1. Jim Grey Avatar

          I’d buy the Nikon. I like the D3100 because its two models discontinued (superseded by the D3200 and the D3300) but the specs aren’t much different from the newer models — and it can be picked up for a bargain, usually factory refurb. Check Adorama and B&H Photo online.

  8. James Taylor Avatar
    James Taylor

    :: Thanks, Jim ::

    i appreciate the advice!

  9. Mike Avatar

    Great right up. I have had several of the “newer” model FTb’s come through my collection. The two I have now, one has a dead meter and the other suffers from the same issue most FT and FTb come down with, shutter capping. Mine wont open the shutter at 1/500 or 1/1000th. But the meter works. It’s a great heavy old camera that is actually pretty on par with the F-1 in fact they share a lot of parts.

    Working ones are cheap and the lenses are great. If you have a chance to pick one up I highly recommend it.

    1. Jim Grey Avatar

      My FT QL had a shutter problem as well as one of the photos above shows. I wish I had repair skills – I would have liked to fix that. My FT QL needed a good CLA all around, really; everything was stiff and slow. But you could tell that this thing was built solid.

  10. Richard Armstrong Avatar
    Richard Armstrong

    Nice review of the FT Jim, as a big Canon fan I appreciated it and agree with your comments, when I got my first SLR back in the dark ages(1967) my choice was between the Canon FT, Praktica Nova and the Pentax SV. I chose the Pentax price was in the middle, I was used to using a hand held meter and it had that feel that you mention in your Spotmatic F review. I never regretted that choice and many more Pentaxes followed but still hankered after a Canon and finally switched when Canon brought out the F1 which also had the “Feel” . Keep up the good work.

    1. Jim Grey Avatar

      Ooo the F-1! I’d like to try one of those one day.

  11. Kent Teffeteller Avatar
    Kent Teffeteller

    My first 35 mm SLR was a Canon FTb QL. Superb optics, reliable and durable. Made superb images. The only thing I disliked about it or any FL/FD mount Canon was the lens mount being 3 hands to change. It was a gift, the friend who bought it for me then was trying to find me a Nikkormat and a 35 or 50 non AI lens, and couldn’t find a lens at a good price. So, he got me the Canon. It got me great images, and it hooked me on 35 mm manual exposure mechanical SLR cameras. Which I still prefer to this day.

    1. Jim Grey Avatar

      Heh, yeah, it is a challenge to change FD/FL lenses. The Canon FD/FL lenses are wonderful bargains, though.

  12. Paul Avatar

    It’s easy to tell if you have loaded a film correctly. When you wind on, check the film rewind knob is turning as you wind. I’ve done the blank roll thing, so this is my way of checking. By the way, I just got one of these in all black. A few dents and scratches and some nice patina on the edges where the the brass is showing through the black. Shutter works well and the meter is only one stop out. Feels like it has been carved out of a solid block of granit and is probably as heavy. Would no doubt be an effective weapon with a strong strap on it! I absolutely love it.

    1. Jim Grey Avatar

      Thanks Paul – the rewind crank thing I finally learned some years after I wrote this. Yes — this camera would make a fine weapon!

  13. Christoph Avatar

    And only 9 years after this post I got mine Canon FT QL. Also have a shutter issue, but I hope I will pass. Camera was in an attic at the family for years. I think it’s the heaviest SLR I have now, even heavier than my Russian Zenits or the Kodak Retina. As I’m living in the countryside now, maybe I’ll use it tripod mount for bird photography, let’s see. But at least a reason to keep on blogging…

    1. Jim Grey Avatar

      Terrific! I shared your review on a Recommended Reading post a week or two ago.

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: