Ok Coanonnites let's all vote for the best canon FD mount ever made. I know the F1 and variants were some of the toughest cameras ever made. I have one bought new in '73 and there is no telling the times the shutter has been actuated and never to the shop I know the A1, very dear to my heart, was probably the most innovative of it's time The AE1P put SLR ease in the hands of the masses But my vote goes to the one called "the tank" The Canon T90 No other manual focus camera packed so many features into such a rugged and dependable camera. It was way ahead of it time and it inspired the EOS 1 series of cameras. But even the great EOS 1's have never had the features and especially the metering system of the T90. The spot meter and the H/S feature alone are worth the price. Being able to spot meter and store different readings then average them out or to set E/C was a God send. It is the only metering I have ever trusted 100% t blew away the competition with auto film indexing, DX coding and a motor drive built in. The competition had nothing to offer in it's class. unfortuneatly the era of manual focus was in it's death throws by then.. Here is my favorite of the three I own
Post by vintageslrs on Jul 29, 2006 15:32:20 GMT -5
I would choose the Canon FTb....what a simple beauty that can do anything with the right "head" behind it and it is built like a tank, can use all those great FD lenses and has stood the test of time!! Sorry, I just can't get to into the later mostly plastic Canons....like you and Peter W. like so much.. ;D....hate those plasticly body and what do I need all those features for....I don't even use the light meter....I trust the light meter in my head more than any in a camera. so, for me.....it's the FTb.
Yes Bob, I too like the older all-metal Canons like the FTb and its predecessors the FX and FP. They've got a simple, solid reliability about them. I haven't got an F1 of my own, but I can use John's almost whenever I want to. At the moment he's having a love affair with a new ist Pentax digital, mainly because we no longer have a darkroom.
The Canon I used for longest is the A1, and I've still got two of them. I must have taken hundreds - literally - of rolls with them and they didn't miss a beat. I've also got a third A1 but don't use it because it eats batteries. I'm told it's a simple matter of a short in the battery check switch wiring, but with two others in good order I just haven't got around to having the top off to take a look.
However, since I got a T70 I've been using that a lot. I love the push-button convenience and the metering of it, and although it's mainly plastic it's still got that solid Canon feel. And I can use all my FD and FD-fit lenses, breech lock or twist-lock, on it without loosing any of the functions. Also it runs on two cheap AA alkaline batteries - the type recommended by Canon. I'd like a T90 but haven't been able to justify the prices being asked.
I borrowed a couple of the early EOS range and though I liked the way they worked, the handling didn't seem to suit me. But then the feel a camera is a purely personal thing. It's what you get used to.
I tried one of the top of the range Canon digital SLRs, and I really did like the feel of it, but they're way out of my price range at the moment, so I'll stick with the T70 for the foreseeable future.
I've tried a couple of borrowed older top-range Nikons and while I can't disagree about their build quality or reliability they didn't have the same feel for me as a Canon. But, as I said, that's a subjective personal thing. What put me off the earlier Nikons and made me choose Canon was that fiddly fork fitting of the lenses and having to turn the aperture ring each time a lens was changed. With the Canon it's always been fit and go. I can change the twist-lock ones without even looking - and frequently do!
So what's the best Canon ever made? I think the jury's still out on the T series and later models, but before those it's got to be the F1. It was a legend in it's own lifetime.
Yes, Bob, I frequently use the 'meter in my head' - instinct, guesstimation, experience, call it what you like, when I take out one my older cameras loaded with colour print or B&W because both those are very forgiving a couple of stops either way. It's what I grew up with anyway.
However, I learned to trust a properly used hand meter when I was taking a lot colour of transparencies for magazines. More than half a stop out on early E4 Ektachrome, or failing to use a UV filter near the sea, and the colour balance went right up the spout, usually with a blue cast. Fujichrome I found more forgiving, and realised why so many pros were switching to it. Kodachrome always gave superb colours, but took too long to get processed for magazine work. I tried some other transparency films but didn't like them. Agfa had too much of a pastel look, and Gaevert was similar. Ferrania, even the later 3M Ferrania, was just unpredictable in its colour balance.
I first used a Zeiss Ikon Ikophot meter but I lost it out somewhere, so I bought a Weston Euromaster. When that went wrong one day while I was out on a job I bought a cheap Leningrad 4, and later a Leningrad 7, and they've been so reliable they're what I still use if a need a hand meter.
With the A1 and the T70 I trust the camera's metering all the time. As aircraft pilots are told: "Learn to use your instruments and then trust them. They know better than you do." The key words are 'learn to use'. It applies to hand-held or TTL meters.
I seem to have wandered off the original subject - as usual - sorry!
That's the one Rick. Though 1973 will make it an earlier model. John's is a later one with detachable pentaprism, and a motor drive more like the 'drool' one you posted, only rather more work-worn (I'm still drooling!)
Used a Canon F1 when I was in a military public information detachment in the early '70s. It was a tough reliable piece of equipment--never failed me. I didn't think is was as nice to operate as the Nikon F2 but it was every bit as tough. That's the only slr canon I ever used.
Post by vintageslrs on Jul 29, 2006 19:40:29 GMT -5
Your wanderings are always welcomed and enjoyed! I read with interest your writings concerning the "meter in your head" versus the TTL metering. We differ slightly because you started photography with the "head" meter and learned how to use and to trust the TTL or the hand held metering. Me, it was the opposite. I started with the TTL meters of Fujica, Minolta, Nikon.....and then progressed to a good hand-held....and progressed to the meter in my "head". Last weekend Sherri and I were out taking photos of some old New England architecture. It was a very bright day....and the buildings we were photographing were white....a tough exposure situation. The Fujica meter was calling for one setting....the Konica meter for a different bizarre setting. I said the heck with both of them used my "head" or perhaps better described as my system.....and guess what? When I got the photos back...the exposure....my exposures were right on the money! Significantly better than the exposure either of the other meters were calling for. That seals it for me. I trust me......not any meter!
We (or rather I) seem to have wandered off the subject of Canons, and I don't know the Fujica or Konica systems, but maybe one's spot or centre-weighted and the other's averaging (that's why many Canons have a choice of metering systems, you use the appropriate one for the job) .
I agree that was a very difficult type of subject to meter, especially in bright sunlight. Glare reflected from a light subject can also confuse a meter whereas our eyes 'stop down' fairly quickly and we don't notice it. Did you try going close to the buildings. metering the white parts and the darker parts and then biasing the average slightly one way or the other, like you would with a hand-held meter in a difficult exposure situation? If you had done I would take a small bet that the result would have been very close to the actual exposure you gave.
The trouble with many TTL metering systems is that they average the reading over the whole frame, so that if, for example, you've got a fairly small backlit subject, then unless you take a reading close up the meter reading under-exposues the part you want to be accurately exposed. The Spotmatic, btw, isn't a true spot metering system despite its name, it's centre-weighted.
Never mind, each to his own. It would be a dull old world if we all thought alike. And you got the result you wanted, that's the main thing.
I like the Original F1 or the first update. Built like an M1 Tank. The EOS 1n is wonderful, I have handled the EOS 1V and it has a great viewfinder especially for glasses wearers like me. I have never tried the F1N but I have seen them.
I vote for my Canon EP, well built, good glass, reliable, no batteries to wear out. However I'm am considering upgrading to one of those fancier Canon's, either the A1 of F1...just to keep somewhat up with the times.
Post by physiognomy on Oct 27, 2006 0:27:18 GMT -5
I vote for my Canon EP, well built, good glass, reliable, no batteries to wear out....
Whoa Paul... That was one huge picture (2356x1530) ... We try to keep the maximum width to around 800 pixels so they are visable on a normal screen & don't take 1/2hr to load on dial up. If you don't know how to resize just give a shout & I'm sure many of us would be more than willing to help.
The early screwmount Canon models were designated with a roman numeral (II through VI) & the serial # should help you determine the exact model. You might also be able to figure it out from the Canon Camera Museum:
See you've managed to get a picture posted. As Peter says, you need to get the size down. If you look at the Recent Posts section, you'll see that your Canon EP picture has pulled the posts all over the place. Just resize it down to 800 wide and put it on your picture hosting site with the same name as the previous version.
Post by Just Plain Curt on Oct 27, 2006 6:16:16 GMT -5
Hi Paul, Glad to have you here in our group. As the fellows have said, when you post your pictures it works best if you size them below 800 wide. I've taken the liberty of doing this for you. I hope you don't mind. By the way, that's one beauty of a Canon RF, wish I had one myself. Keep posting and don't worry here, it took me a while to learn the posting sizes too.