Build quality down the generations

[xkaes]

I can tell you'd be really handy to have around on a wilderness trek.

 

[Les Sarile]

I'm fairly new to this forum, and have inadvertently posted the same image twice. I'm in the fortunate position of owning several pro film SLR cameras. One from the 70's, one from the 80's, and one from the early 2000's. The EOS-1V is amazing, and by all accounts, pretty indestructible. I use mine a lot. It's completely dependable. But so are the others.

The film rails on these three cameras - Nikon F2, Canon F-1 New, and Canon EOS-1V have shrunk through each new generation. As much as I love my EOS-1V, I'm mightily impressed by how over-engineered the F2 is.

Did you know that with the EOS-1V the shutter curtains may get damaged if you point the lens at the sun while in mirror lockup while the other two cameras you listed will be unfazed by it because their shutters are titanium?

 

[Colin Templeton]

Did you know that with the EOS-1V the shutter curtains may get damaged if you point the lens at the sun while in mirror lockup while the other two cameras you listed will be unfazed by it because their shutters are titanium?

I was aware that the F2 had a titanium shutter curtain, but didn't know that about the 1V. I have a Leica M2, and am always wary about burning a hole in its cloth curtain, and I generally extend that wariness to any camera in strong sunlight.

 

[Les Sarile]

I was aware that the F2 had a titanium shutter curtain, but didn't know that about the 1V. I have a Leica M2, and am always wary about burning a hole in its cloth curtain, and I generally extend that wariness to any camera in strong sunlight.

Although I knew at a young age you could burn things with a magnifying glass facing the sun, this didn't cross my mind when I acquired my first slr - EOS3. I did read that warning in the manual though.

Apparently Nikon found this out during the Nikon F development and also put it in the SP since they both used the same shutter mechanism. I am not sure if this is a first for the F.

 

[gone]

The price of all decent film cameras seems to be constantly rising these past few years.

They're not making any more, so the prices will continue to rise. Same w/ the lenses.

 

[BMbikerider]

I am not sure how many Nikon F 4 models there are out there in the US still functioning and returning the goods, but in UK there are a lot more F4 models around for sale and being used than any of the Canon Eos1, 1n and 1v versions. A dealer told me back in the 1990's his opinion of the F4 was, it was built to show Canon how to really make a camera. If it wasn't for the weight I would still have one myself.

But moving further back in time any of the F2 models are even better. Being mostly mechanical they generally can be repaired back to a good standard and even the meters on the F2 can be repaired by replacing the electronic parts that are being made in UK.

But moving off the Pro side the mechanical SLR's from most manufacturers, whilst not getting thrashed as much as the Pro versions are still around and are still capable of turning in the goods. I recently bought a Nikkormat FT3. It has been used, certainly, but everything works exactly as it did when it was made. I had the first roll of b&w film through and the exposure was pretty well spot on. A full 36 exp film with all the exposures correct is unusual for me. And this only with centre weighted metering. This is more than I can say for either my F100 or F80. using the fancy metering which is as I found, not all it is cracked up to be all the time.

 

[BMbikerider]

As I understand the 1V is still be serviced by Canon as long as it is sent to Japan. The Nikon F6 will serviced by Nikon for another few years, last complaint was that Nikon USA was not providing AF calibration. Although I am pretty happy with my Minolta AF bodies, I do wish I had gone Canon, as any full frame EOS lens will work on any Canon EOS body, including VR lens. My Sony SSM lens will not work on most of my Minolta bodies, only the 7 and 5. My 9 had been factory upgraded to work with SSM lens.

I will also go along with the Minolta AF bodies especially the Dynax 9 but they are/were a complex electronic masterpiece where, if one segment fails they are irrepairable. I have used Nikon for a lot of years and gradually moving over to their older mechanical models, but equally the Minolta 101 versions and the other similar models are equally as reliable as the Nikon FT3/FM/Fm2/ FM2n.
Minolta models, but they had the skids taken away from their older models to some degree when the battery used for the meter, the 1.35v Mercury cell was withdrawn from sale. There are alternatives but they are of limited life.

The Minolta lenses I found were always of a very high standard and I have yet to find a really poor one. The 35/70 and 70/210 constant aperture zooms, with the optics being unchanged, only the barrels being beefed up to their standard.

 

[benjiboy]

One condition to think about is that forty years ago a professional camera could last a keen photographer, whether amateur or pro with reasonable use, and occasional servicing a whole career. .There are no needs these days to even in pro cameras to build them like tanks, because the digital technology they contain is so soon outdated and has been superseded before they are off the drawing board .

 

[gone]

High build quality is still available, but the prices are not very tempting. Quality is a relative and subjective word too.

As an example, a $40, beat up, old Nikkormat that works properly today is still a high quality camera. A Leicaflex Standard is also a high quality camera, but it's in a different league than the Nikkormat due to the way it was made and assembled. That difference was reflected in their selling price, and each was marketed to totally different types of buyers.

Economics are maybe the most important factor in build quality. Nikon sold a gazillion Nikkormats, many of them to pro photographers. So that enabled them to sell their cameras w/ the same build quality as before at lower prices, and still maintain their profit margin.

 

[gone]

batteries are a nuisance

Tell that to the person w/ a heart pacemaker.

 

[grat]

Tell that to the person w/ a heart pacemaker.

Well, it's a bit of a false equivalence to equate a device for recreational photography to a device that fulfills a medical necessity...... but aside from that, since a good general definition of "nuisance" is "One that is inconvenient, annoying, or vexatious; a bother.", I'm sure that a pacemaker patient is grateful for the pacemaker, but annoyed by the necessity of paying attention to the battery itself, not to mention the other drawbacks of a pacemaker.

Also nice of you to totally ignore the next sentence, which was "But not having them is more of a nuisance, and it's just one of those things you have to take into account", a statement which is certainly applicable to pacemakers.

 

[4season]

One thing's for sure: 35 mm camera technology advanced enormously in the postwar era. Am pretty amazed by last-generation, entry-level Canon SLRs which pack a remarkable amount of know-how into a lightweight and relatively affordable package. I may not care for silvery painted plastic finishes, or rubberized surfaces turned sticky, but they had essentially nailed problems of vibration and noise, and made it all but impossible to mis-load the film, while virtually eliminating the need for Clean-Lube-Adjust sorts of maintenance.

Downsides of these higher-tech marvels is that, if service is needed, the technician may need to possess a different range of skills and tools, as the innards of some newer cameras look more akin to a laser printer than a camera designed just a few decades prior.

 

[ph]

Note that the film rails of the Zeiss Werra is striated at an agle to the film movement (same angle but different directions above and below the gate). Presumably to promote film flatness.

As to efforts to increase quality, lens design is a good example. Lower cost for lenses not fully corrected compensated by
far cheaper electronic means, provides nearly as good results accessible to a larger group of buyers. Also, high performance-
and surprisingly strong synthetic materials plus precise robots can replace expensive technicians and supply a mass market especially if the products hava a short life.

p.

 

[snusmumriken]

I was aware that the F2 had a titanium shutter curtain, but didn't know that about the 1V. I have a Leica M2, and am always wary about burning a hole in its cloth curtain, and I generally extend that wariness to any camera in strong sunlight.

I had a boss who put his finger through the titanium shutters of two successive Olympus SLRs.

 

[wiltw]

I had a boss who put his finger through the titanium shutters of two successive Olympus SLRs.

Titanium-shuttered Olympus SLR...which model?

 

[snusmumriken]

Titanium-shuttered Olympus SLR...which model?

I don't know. Have I mis-remembered? It was 35 years ago. What I really remember is that they were foil shutters, and I thought they were Olympus. The takeaway point is that they were technologically great but not everyone should be allowed to have them.

 

[wiltw]

I don't know. Have I mis-remembered? It was 35 years ago. What I really remember is that they were foil shutters, and I thought they were Olympus. The takeaway point is that they were technologically great but not everyone should be allowed to have them.

The only Olympus that I am aware of with metal shutter was the Olympus Pen F series made 1963-70, a half-frame SLR.

 

[snusmumriken]

The only Olympus that I am aware of with metal shutter was the Olympus Pen F series made 1963-70, a half-frame SLR.

OK, thanks, but like I said that wasn't the point of the story.

 

[Chan Tran]

And my computer and cell phone have failed me over and over thanks to their dead batteries.

Thanks so much for reminding me of all the trouble they have caused me over the years.

Maybe taking a few pictures with a camera that won't fail will help bring down my blood pressure.

Both laptop computer and cell phone have short battery life. Laptop is worse. I almost never use my laptop on battery alone. If I use my cell phone a lot it won't last a day. The Canon EOS-1V on the other hand battery should last much longer. I never really worry about battery in a film camera.

 

[film_man]

Both laptop computer and cell phone have short battery life. Laptop is worse. I almost never use my laptop on battery alone. If I use my cell phone a lot it won't last a day. The Canon EOS-1V on the other hand battery should last much longer. I never really worry about battery in a film camera.

Both my mechanical and electronic cameras fail every 36 shots and I have to replace the image sensor.

 

[Chan Tran]

Both my mechanical and electronic cameras fail every 36 shots and I have to replace the image sensor.

They didn't fail. By the way you just used up the 36 sensors in your load. They are one time use sensors.

 

[jtk]

Both laptop computer and cell phone have short battery life. Laptop is worse. I almost never use my laptop on battery alone. If I use my cell phone a lot it won't last a day. The Canon EOS-1V on the other hand battery should last much longer. I never really worry about battery in a film camera.

None of my tech suffers battery failure. My cell lasts all day long under heavy use (Android) and my digital cameras are carried with spare batteries, which take up less space than a roll of 35mm. And of course, camera memory is absolutely tiny...

 

[guangong]

I have seldom felt the need for automatic exposure or automatic focusing, so I am still using my Nikon F and F2 cameras with plain finders. Same is true of my Leica ltm, Canon clones (made better than Leitz ltm) and M3, M4 cameras. The M cameras made after demise of Leitz, according to friends who worked at Leica, experienced cost cutting and are not the same quality. All of these cameras have been working for many, many decades.:Frankly, beginning in 1962, I myself have never heard of a Nikon F or F2 failing.
My battery dependent cameras are not doing as well. Meters in two Minox BL cameras just died. Waiting for batteries to insert into my C and LX, but I suspect that my battery free IIIs cameras will be going strong long after C and LX electronic meters and shutters die.
I don’t criticize those with failing eyesight, etc who depend upon auto exposure and auto focusing. Just that I myself am too absent minded to carry extra batteries every time I go out to shoot.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I have seldom felt the need for automatic exposure or automatic focusing, so I am still using my Nikon F and F2 cameras with plain finders. Same is true of my Leica ltm, Canon clones (made better than Leitz ltm) and M3, M4 cameras. The M cameras made after demise of Leitz, according to friends who worked at Leica, experienced cost cutting and are not the same quality. All of these cameras have been working for many, many decades.:Frankly, beginning in 1962, I myself have never heard of a Nikon F or F2 failing.
My battery dependent cameras are not doing as well. Meters in two Minox BL cameras just died. Waiting for batteries to insert into my C and LX, but I suspect that my battery free IIIs cameras will be going strong long after C and LX electronic meters and shutters die.
I don’t criticize those with failing eyesight, etc who depend upon auto exposure and auto focusing. Just that I myself am too absent minded to carry extra batteries every time I go out to shoot.

I use autofocusing on the cameras that have the feature. It is a convinience that has my interests in mind. For the cameras without autofocus, I still use them. It is just one of the options I use. Sometimes I use the exposure of the builtin light meters as shown. Using autofocus and autoexposure does not make be a bad person.

 

[Marcelo Paniagua]

I am not sure how many Nikon F 4 models there are out there in the US still functioning and returning the goods, but in UK there are a lot more F4 models around for sale and being used than any of the Canon Eos1, 1n and 1v versions. A dealer told me back in the 1990's his opinion of the F4 was, it was built to show Canon how to really make a camera. If it wasn't for the weight I would still have one myself.

I had 2 F4 and ended selling them mostly because of weight and ergonomics. Sure, it was build like a rock with tons of features but so was Olympus OM4 and it was way smaller. Still got my 3 OM4 by the way.