|
Post by rickoleson on Jan 11, 2015 19:17:18 GMT -5
First, I agree with Wayne on the Canon P.... better than anything Canon did before or since. If we have to stick within the FD mount, though, my first place vote goes to the EF of 1973 and second goes to the original F1 or 1970. These 3 all had a much higher percentage of Real Stuff in them than their later counterparts.
rick
|
|
|
Post by moltogordo on Apr 11, 2015 20:58:42 GMT -5
Can't call myself a Canonite, but I'm a collector. I also have a Canon Rebel because I own the fabulous MP-E 1-5x lens, and now use Canon for much of my closeup work. Beautiful stuff, but you'll still have to pry my K3, MX and LX out of my cold, dead hands.
But answering your question, I go for the straightforward ne elegant FTb - It's the Canon user of my collection, and I have along with it a Canon 50mm f1.8 FD lens, a Canon 100mm f2.8 FD lens, and am looking for a 28. I'm also looking for a good, used F1.
I can think of nothing bad at all to say about this camera. If I had to be limited to one 35mm camera, a guy could do a lot worse. Its rugged, reliable, like the QL loading . . . . two thumbs up.
|
|
|
Post by cooltouch on Jun 9, 2015 12:10:06 GMT -5
Well now -- this is a very interesting, and a very long lasting, thread.
Let me first state that my first 35mm camera was a Canon. Like millions of others who bought a camera for the first time, mine was an AE-1. I enjoyed that camera, but within a year of buying it, I was beginning to feel the itch for something better, something more full-featured. And to me, the camera that filled that bill was the A-1. So I bought one. And I felt like I'd arrived. This was back in 1983 and the A-1 had already been out for about five years, but I didn't know or much care. To me, it was the ultimate. And in many ways, it was. I can recall watching TV commercials about that camera. Hexaphotcybernetic! Remember that mouthful? A word invented to describe the A-1.
But you know what? After I'd owned the A-1 for a few months I began to feel frustrated. I wanted more control and in this respect the A-1 falls somewhat short. There were two principle things I grew to dislike about the A-1: it's metering pattern and the fact that the lens aperture ring wasn't coupled to the meter. I was shooting almost 100% slide film, and because of slide film's very narrow exposure latitude, I had to be very careful with any extraneous light sources that might fall within the viewfinder frame. That was just plain annoying. And not having the aperture ring coupled to the meter meant I had to take my eye away from the viewfinder to check the aperture setting.
Right about that time I read a small review in Jason Schneider's column in Modern Photography on the Canon FTb. His description made me immediately curious. And the photo of the camera further aroused my curiosity. I'd never heard of an FTb, but I was determined to find out more. Within the month I had found one in a photo shop and I bought it -- along with an FL 35mm f/2.5 -- one of my all time favorite 35mm lenses, btw. As I became used to the way the FTb worked, I became more and more appreciative of its design. Shooting with it gave me a pleasure I had never experienced before. I was in control at last. But it was a very simple camera to operate with its match-needle metering and partial metering pattern. In fact, I quickly learned that its partial metering pattern was ideal for slide photography. I had so much more control over difficultly lit scenes. Plus, the camera had mirror lock up -- a feature I've come to regard as close to essential for much of the photography I was doing.
Well, as much as I loved the FTb, I soon learned some about the F-1. The original one, not the New F-1. I wasn't particulary interested in the New F-1 because it didn't have MLU, whereas the original one did. So I went to a camera show with the intent of buying an original F-1. I found a few, all of them were pretty beat up, and I finally decided on one that was probably the least beat up, but everything worked on it. And that camera cinched it for me. It had everything I needed. It had the same partial metering pattern as the FTb, which I had come to depend upon. Interchangeable focusing screens and finders -- even a motor drive option. Which I bought not too much later after buying the camera. I outfitted the camera with a plain matte screen because of a couple of the lenses I used often, for which the standard split-image microprism one didn't work well. That is, they were slow. But I quickly got the hang of focusing with a plain matte screen and my percentage of keepers with my slow lenses took a big step forward.
I clearly recall when the T90 was introduced. I had been shooting with my F-1 for a couple of years when it hit the market. I was quite impressed, and I wanted one. But I ended up never buying one. Until much later -- like a couple of years ago. I liked everything about the T90 except for two things: no MLU and the aperture ring was not coupled with the meter. These were reasons enough for me not to buy it back when it was available new. And the main reason why I finally bought one a couple years ago was just to have it. And its 300TL flash of course. The only FD-mount Canon that had TTL flash, btw. I can honestly say now that I really enjoy using it and that I can overlook its shortcomings. I never really understood why it was called "the tank," though. To me, the original F-1 was the tank.
There were two other FD-mount Canons that intrigued me: the EF and the New F-1. I had bought an EF back in the early 90s, used it for a while, then sold it. It was a very nice camera, but reminded me too much of the AE-1. More recently I bought another, just to have in my Canon collection. It sure is a pretty camera and what it does, it does very well. As for the New F-1, well, these days it's possible to pick up a copy for not a whole lot of money, so I bided my time until I found a good deal on one on eBay -- one with the AE Finder -- so I bought it. Now, this was the first time I've ever really held and operated a New F-1, and I gotta say that camera is probably just about indestructable. I didn't think a camera could be much more rugged than the old F-1, but I was wrong. The New one is even tougher. I know that, if I had to, I could drive nails with that sucker and it wouldn't miss a lick. Shortly after buying the New F-1, I bought a Motor Drive FN for it. Now, there's a combination for you. I can understand now why so many pros liked it, and I can almost forgive Canon for omitting mirror lock up on that camera. Almost.
Oh, and to echo Wayne's sentiment, I agree. The P is a beautiful camera. And I own one of them as well. It is my favorite LTM Canon, but it falls short of being my all-time favorite Canon.
I have to honestly say that, after having used most of Canon's best FD SLRs, that my favorite is still the Original F-1 -- the second version, to be specific, often referred to as the F-1n. The FTb taught me photography, but with the F-1 I got to explore it to the fullest.
|
|
|
Post by lesdmess on Jun 10, 2015 9:14:24 GMT -5
I have to honestly say that, after having used most of Canon's best FD SLRs, that my favorite is still the Original F-1 -- the second version, to be specific, often referred to as the F-1n. The FTb taught me photography, but with the F-1 I got to explore it to the fullest. The FTb didn't lack for much - in terms of specs, compared to the F-1n. Obviously if you need the viewfinders and other accessories only available to the F-1n that can make a difference while the FTb has that very functional QL.
|
|
|
Post by cooltouch on Jun 12, 2015 10:10:17 GMT -5
Yes, the QL feature worked surprisingly well, and I loved my old FTb. I still have a soft spot for them, in fact. I think I own three or four of 'em. But the reasons why the old F-1 got the nod from me over the FTb was primarily two areas: the F-1 has interchangeable focusing screens and it has a motor/winder option. Back then I had a couple long telephotos that were on the slow side, which rendered the FTb's focusing aids not only useless, but annoying because they were in the way. I used plain ground glass screens in my F-1s and got used to focusing without aids. And I've always liked having a motor or winder option because that way I don't have to remove my eye from the finder to advance the film.
|
|
|
Post by paulhofseth on Jun 12, 2015 13:41:28 GMT -5
Early experience; Canonet with terrible flare in the wrong light conditions, so a light meter plus a Leica replaced it. The Canon VIt in my view, had a better viewfinder than the Leica IIIg, and i liked the Canons winding mechanism, but since the M had better optics plus Visoflex, Canon lost out. No experience with early C-SLRs (but my digital 5ii works well). I have however succumbed to the anachrophiliac tendency and harbour an F1n "phone camera" (one of those modified by ALOS in Switzerland). Probably the current non-use Canon favourite.
p
|
|
|
Post by Randy on Jun 13, 2015 17:01:01 GMT -5
Canonette is the only one I have. I've got too many other brands to invest in another. Just gave my Nikons to my grandaughter.
|
|