The Nazi regime outfitted the Wehrmacht with the best photographic technology and its soldiers were far better equipped than their allies or nemeses. More than ten per cent of the eighteen million German combatants possessed a fast-shutter 35-mm camera. German soldier-photographers documented their wartime activities extensively, in turn leaving behind a gigantic, private and largely underexplored archive that poses multiple epistemological and ethical challenges. Military historians and Holocaust scholars approach soldierly photographs primarily as sources of information, including proof of crimes. This article shifts these lenses and argues that reading them as visual images, and not solely as historical sources and circulating artefacts, reveals a medium that equally affects its practitioners as well as the observers. Drawing upon public archives and private collections, I focus on highly performative images of victory and conquest over enemy countries and peoples and conceptualise them as ‘trophy photographs’. I examine recurrent motifs within this genre, in particular sexual encounters with enemy women and photographs of male bonding, which arguably constitute the most prevalent images snapped by soldier-photographers who ‘cruised’ Nazi-occupied Europe. Borrowing from Queer Studies, the concept of cruising allows me to probe soldiers’ mobility in semipublic spaces and also acknowledge the voyeuristic and visually alluring quality of their photographs. Seductive, exciting, these trophy photographs lure in their audience(s) with sexually charged, often (homo)erotic overtones. In turn, these images provoke diverse ways of seeing and interpreting their content: how can we best frame the soldier-photographer’s gaze and capture the polysemic quality of the images, especially when dealing with violence, racism, sexism and/or homoeroticism? What effect do trophy images of conquest potentially have on the historical actors who shot and circulated those photographs and what impact do they have on contemporary observers? Finally, acknowledging multidirectional and fractious lives of images, how do we understand the complex relationship between public history and the ethics of seeing? Because photographic images are historically contingent and open-ended, this article casts light on the complexity of mediation and competing visions between diverse publics of the past, present and future.