Camera dilemma - Canon vs Minolta

[BAC1967]

I have both an AE-1 and a low end Minolta srTsc-II. If I had to choose between the two I would pick the Minolta without hesitation. The Rokkor lenses are great and the Minolta body is very well built. In my opinion the Canon is a bit less reliable with the electronics and overall just doesn't impress me as much. It doesn't sound like the OP has invested much in lenses so that should make the choice much easier. An AE-1 is hardly worth the investment a repair would cost.

 

[Sirius Glass]

You must have been doing something wrong. I've been using my AE1-P regularly for the last six years, and don't recall ever having issues with film slipping off the sprockets or improperly winding onto the spool. When loading film, I follow the instructions in the camera's manual very precisely.

Is that a RTFM?

 

[flavio81]

Is that a RTFM?

Looks like a RTM at least.

And i agree with him, i never had any problem with film slipping or loading with the AE-1, A-1, nor with any Canon or Nikon or Pentax 35mm camera.

 

[Chan Tran]

I have 3 Canon SLR. The AE-1, AE1-P and the A-1. I have never used anyone of them. I think I paid the highest price for the AE-1P of $25. I paid $17 for the A-1 and $5 for the AE-1. All are fully functional and good cosmetically.

 

[flavio81]

I have 3 Canon SLR. The AE-1, AE1-P and the A-1. I have never used anyone of them. I think I paid the highest price for the AE-1P of $25. I paid $17 for the A-1 and $5 for the AE-1. All are fully functional and good cosmetically.

$25?
$17?
$5?

I must travel to Aurora, Illinois RIGHT NOW!!

 

[blockend]

You must have been doing something wrong. I've been using my AE1-P regularly for the last six years, and don't recall ever having issues with film slipping off the sprockets or improperly winding onto the spool. When loading film, I follow the instructions in the camera's manual very precisely.

Impossible to say at a distance, but I agree it sounds like user error. Check out YouTube videos on A-series Canons, especially the excellent Fix Old Cameras site which has a run down on common Canon repairs.

 

[emmmmuh]

Hi everyone - sorry I've only just got back! Thank you for all your replies and suggestions

So, update time: Minolta is a keeper. As for the AE-1, I have been playing around with it and doing some research, and the conclusion is I don't think it's the light meter that's dead. When the ASA's set to 3200 and a shutter speed of ~1 or 2 secs the needle functions perfectly. I fully expect this is not enough to justify a repair, but perhaps there is some hope? Honestly I'm kicking myself that I didn't act on this earlier when I still had options, but oh well, the lesson has been learnt.

All has not been completely lost, I was lucky enough to find a bargain A-1 body for a tiny proportion of the price I paid for the AE-1, ironically. I've now got the 50mm 1.8 from the AE on that - it's not a huge upgrade from the X300, but it's given me some new functionality. I think the light seals might need replacing, but *hopefully* that's all. Thanks again for your input, everyone.

 

[flavio81]

All has not been completely lost, I was lucky enough to find a bargain A-1 body for a tiny proportion of the price I paid for the AE-1, ironically. I've now got the 50mm 1.8 from the AE on that - it's not a huge upgrade from the X300, but it's given me some new functionality. I think the light seals might need replacing, but *hopefully* that's all. Thanks again for your input, everyone.

The Canon A-1 seems to be like Marmite/Vegemite: either you love it a lot or you don't like it at all. Tell me how do you find it.

Since you're back in the Canon FD land, these are my recommendations for cheap FD lenses that are really good performers:

FD 28/3.5, FD 28/2.8
FD 35/3.5*, FD 35/2.8
FD 50/1.4 can be had for cheap in the older ("S.S.C.") versions
FD 100/2.8
FD 135/3.5

* yeah, f3.5 is slow but this is a really excellent performing lens.

Also remember that you can also use Canon FL lenses on your camera, and some of them are wonderful and fly "under the radar" (prices still low)

 

[Dennis S]

I have had a lot of good results from Canon FL lenses as well as the FDs that have been mentioned. Other good results were from the FD 135/2.5 lens also the 85/1.8 SSC is no slouch for it self. The durability of all Canon FL/FD lenses keeps me as a satisfied customer.

 

[Toyo]

If you already have some Canon FD or FL lenses - most of which are really good by the way - why not buy a cheap Canon FTb.
They are plentiful (and ultra-reliable as they are totally mechanical).
The Canon FTb also comes with the Canon QL film load system which is quick and foolproof.
Light meter is semi spot metering - ie about 12-1/2% of the central area of the viewfinder
You don't really need the light meter which is the only thing to use a battery, and you can find used light meters very cheaply as well.
I expect that acquiring an FTb and a light meter would be cheaper than repairing the AE-1
T

 

[emmmmuh]

First roll back from the lab today, there are light leaks as expected - they don't seem to be too serious though. Despite that these are the nicest pictures I've taken on Colorplus (a film I don't particularly like!).

The Canon A-1 seems to be like Marmite/Vegemite: either you love it a lot or you don't like it at all. Tell me how do you find it.

Since you're back in the Canon FD land, these are my recommendations for cheap FD lenses that are really good performers:

FD 28/3.5, FD 28/2.8
FD 35/3.5*, FD 35/2.8
FD 50/1.4 can be had for cheap in the older ("S.S.C.") versions
FD 100/2.8
FD 135/3.5

* yeah, f3.5 is slow but this is a really excellent performing lens.

Also remember that you can also use Canon FL lenses on your camera, and some of them are wonderful and fly "under the radar" (prices still low)

So far so good I find it easier to focus than the Minolta. People say that the top is crowded, which I get would be a problem if you had bigger hands. The ASA dial's a pain but everything is usable and I'm sure it's something I'll get used to. Thanks for the recommendations, I'll check those out!

I have had a lot of good results from Canon FL lenses as well as the FDs that have been mentioned. Other good results were from the FD 135/2.5 lens also the 85/1.8 SSC is no slouch for it self. The durability of all Canon FL/FD lenses keeps me as a satisfied customer.

I've heard good things from Canon lenses. This little 1.8 is already outperforming my MD zoom on the X300 (and it's a poor zoom at that, to be honest). I'm looking forward to building up a collection.

 

[flavio81]

I have had a lot of good results from Canon FL lenses as well as the FDs that have been mentioned. Other good results were from the FD 135/2.5 lens also the 85/1.8 SSC is no slouch for it self. The durability of all Canon FL/FD lenses keeps me as a satisfied customer.

Those two are excellent, but I think they are not as dirt cheap as the ones i've listed.

The FD 135/2.5 is also a large, heavy monster. I posted elsewhere on how lens dimensions have an effect on performance. Well, the opposite spectrum is the FD 135/2.5 S.C. It has totally splendid performance, being really sharp even wide open, having no distortion, high contrast, no chromatic aberrations, really nice bokeh...

... at the drawback of being a BIG, HEAVY monster!!

It is bigger/heavier than the equivalent and contemporary 2.5 or 2.8 135mm lenses of Nikon, Minolta and Pentax. Not to mention Olympus of course.

At the end i replaced it with the New FD 135/3.5 which is really light, sharp, but does not have the magical bokeh. I also bought a Canon R 135/2.5 which has a different optical design, a beauty!

But in those times (1959-1964), i feel that Canon was behind Pentax and Nikon in the quality of the mechanical construction of the lenses, some lenses having diaphragm reliability problems. This massively improved with the 2nd generation Canon FL lenses (circa 1968), which are great.

 

[flavio81]

If you already have some Canon FD or FL lenses - most of which are really good by the way - why not buy a cheap Canon FTb.
They are plentiful (and ultra-reliable as they are totally mechanical).
The Canon FTb also comes with the Canon QL film load system which is quick and foolproof.
Light meter is semi spot metering - ie about 12-1/2% of the central area of the viewfinder
You don't really need the light meter which is the only thing to use a battery, and you can find used light meters very cheaply as well.
I expect that acquiring an FTb and a light meter would be cheaper than repairing the AE-1
T

The FTb is a really good camera but the CdS meter is slow in response (in low light) compared to the AE-1/ AE-1P / A-1, which meter instantly. With the FTb, on low light, you need to wait for the meter needle to settle.

As for reliability, the Canon A-series camera are reliable, to be honest. The shutter on them is very very reliable. It was so good from the start, that the same shutter (introduced 1976 on the AE-1) was used unchanged on the AE-P (1981). As for the electronics, the AE-1P is much improved over the AE-1 for many reasons, one of them being better, more streamlined circuits.

Now, for the problem the OP is experiencing on his AE-1: The AE-1 uses a string&pulley arrangement to relay the ISO setting and shutter speeds to the variable resistor of the camera. They are located at opposite sides of the camera. If this string breaks or gets stuck, the problem will be similar to what the OP is experiencing. Fortunately, it is an easy repair.

The AE-1P does not require this string, as far as I know, making for a more reliable camera.

In any case, if the OP is looking for a manual match-needle Canon camera, there's no substitute for the Canon F-1 !

 

[emmmmuh]

The FTb is a really good camera but the CdS meter is slow in response (in low light) compared to the AE-1/ AE-1P / A-1, which meter instantly. With the FTb, on low light, you need to wait for the meter needle to settle.

As for reliability, the Canon A-series camera are reliable, to be honest. The shutter on them is very very reliable. It was so good from the start, that the same shutter (introduced 1976 on the AE-1) was used unchanged on the AE-P (1981). As for the electronics, the AE-1P is much improved over the AE-1 for many reasons, one of them being better, more streamlined circuits.

Now, for the problem the OP is experiencing on his AE-1: The AE-1 uses a string&pulley arrangement to relay the ISO setting and shutter speeds to the variable resistor of the camera. They are located at opposite sides of the camera. If this string breaks or gets stuck, the problem will be similar to what the OP is experiencing. Fortunately, it is an easy repair.

The AE-1P does not require this string, as far as I know, making for a more reliable camera.

In any case, if the OP is looking for a manual match-needle Canon camera, there's no substitute for the Canon F-1 !

Would you say it's worth getting the AE-1 looked at then? I don't want to spend a ton of money I won't make back if I sell it...

 

[flavio81]

Would you say it's worth getting the AE-1 looked at then? I don't want to spend a ton of money I won't make back if I sell it...

Only if the price of service is half what you would pay for a fully working AE-1...