Canon A series or Canon eos?

[Peter de Groot]

Hi,

I have rather strange question I think. In september I will start studies in photography. This school Still teaches using analogue camera's and darkroom techniques. So for this reason I am looking for a analogue Canon camera. I can't choose between a Eos canon because my digital canon is also an Eos. Therefor my 50 mm and 100 mm I can use on an analoge Eos as wel. Or I can buy myself something like a Canon A1 with lenses. And a motorwinder and stuff.
I know it makes sens to buy an Canon Eos. Motordrive, autofocus use of lenses I already have. But On the other hand I really like the oldfashioned stuff as wel. But no autofocus and different lens mount. So can anyone share their views on this matter? Oh I don't have the money yet to buy both versions. If I would have I would rather spend it on extra's for my Kowa super 66.

Any insight would be greatly appreciated.

Regards,

Peter

 

[DWThomas]

Flip a coin! Assuming your EOS lenses are not the EF-S variety, cross over use is attractive. But you can buy an A series body and FD lenses for very low prices today so it won't cost a whole lot of money to put together a small kit. I'd think for most classes you might not need more than one lens, a "normal" 50 mm or so. But if you decide not to share your EOS lenses, maybe some other make altogether would be worth a look. I personally have an A-1 and a few FD lenses; I still rather like it for the rare occasions I shoot 35mm film.

DaveT

 

[Venchka]

I own FD and EOS zoom lenses and EF, EOS-1 and Elan IIe cameras. The EOS-EF zooms are very nice and very expensive. I feel that my FD prime lenses: 24/2.8, 35/3.5, 50/1.4 and 50/3.5 Macro are my best SLR lenses and on par with my RF lenses. Current Canon lenses are not built as well and I think the optical qualities may not match the older lenses. I also have decent FD mount zooms: 24-70 and 80-200. The EOS-EF lenses do the job. I enjoy using the FD lenses.

Just one invidual's opinion.

 

[Pumal]

I prefer Manual Focus so I would go for a 'New' F-1 with an AE finder FN or a Motor Drve and/or an A-1 and a bunch of great FD lenses (dirt cheap now a days).

 

[Ian Grant]

I'd look out for a cheap bargain priced EOS body, then see if anyone's selling a Canon A series outfit, often an outfit sells for lower prices than you'd expect.

Ian

 

[Peter de Groot]

I have a pentax set now. A z20 body and some manual lenses. The 50 and 100 are not the ef-s variety. Just too bad that Canon decided to use a different lensmount starting with the eos series. Pentax and Nikon are more user friendly in that respect.

 

[delphine]

..

 

[Mark Fisher]

I shoot EOS and and OM1. I like both, but for different purposes. The OM1 is smaller, lighter and a more satisfying piece of hardware. I suspect the same is true for the FD mount Canons. On the other hand, the EOS is insanely fast to use and is great for people photography. They both will take great pictures, but which is best depends on how you want to use them.

 

[Jeff Kubach]

EOS system is great, but I kinda like the FD system a little bit better.

Jeff

 

[dougjgreen]

If you want manual focus, I personally prefer Minoltas to Canon FD series. The Minoltas have better ergonomics, and I find that the lenses are available for even lower prices than the Canon FDs. A Minolta XD-11 is, IMHO, superior to a Canon A-1 in just about every way, and probably costs around the same if not slightly less. A Minolta X-570 will be even cheaper and is just a great, practical film camera. Both the Minolta MC/MD and Canon FD lens mounts are dead ends, so bargains abound for both.

If you want to go for AF, you should certainly also bring Nikon into the conversation. Nikon and Canon are the dominant AF systems, and, I hesitate to mention it, but their AF film systems are compatible with Digital gear as well. The decision between Autofocus and Manual focus is a personal one, and nobody can really say which one would be best for someone else.

 

[Peter de Groot]

@ Doug: Damn even more choices Wel as far as I can see the by you mentioned Minaltas are not for sale here in the netherlands. Just a lot of xd-5 or xd 7 or x300 and so. And those are bit more expensive then the Canon. As far as AF if I choose that I would stick to Canon. Well keeps me busy for a while. Thanks for the reactions. Keep um coming.

Regards,

Peter

 

[3 Olives]

I don't see how you could go wrong with an A-1 - they are built like tanks and there are some extremely good, inexpensive, lenses available.

 

[flatulent1]

Peter, the XD7 in Europe is America's XD11. Very nice camera, very smooth operation. Expect to replace the covering. MD lenses are as undervalued as Canon FD lenses, but as they weren't as popular as FD they're sometimes harder to find.

If you already have EOS lenses that are not EF-S, then you can pick up an EOS 600 for very little. It's a great camera, I have several and I love them. EOS 5 is also good, and cheap.

Otherwise you could get yourself a fully manual Canon AT-1 and a handful of FD lenses for under $100, then pick up a T90 or A1 later if you want to expand.

 

[sidearm613]

Hi Peter. I personally recommend sticking with the EOS system. I use EOS, and it works great. Go on craigslist or the auction site and pick up an EOS 1/1N for less than the cost of a decent USM prime, have lots of fun. If you want that old style look, save your lust for later, fall madly in love with film photography, and buy a Hasselblad 500 C/M. Thats the old style look...

 

[Krzys]

Canon T90!

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

If you want a camera with an EOS feel and an FD mount, the T90 is the answer.

I've had a Canon New F-1 since it was new in the early 1980s, and I have an EOS mount camera of the sort that isn't discussed on APUG, and I've made it work out that most of my lenses can be used on both--Tamron Adaptall II's, M42 mount, and FD mount teles that can be used with the Canon FD-EOS converter (which is hard to find and only works with lenses 200mm and longer, so I wouldn't buy an FD camera with a plan of buying an original Canon FD-EOS converter). I have no interest in autofocus, so this works for me.

 

[dougjgreen]

@ Doug: Damn even more choices Wel as far as I can see the by you mentioned Minaltas are not for sale here in the netherlands. Just a lot of xd-5 or xd 7 or x300 and so. And those are bit more expensive then the Canon. As far as AF if I choose that I would stick to Canon. Well keeps me busy for a while. Thanks for the reactions. Keep um coming.

Regards,

Peter

The XD-7 is the same camera as the XD-11, it was called the XD-7 in Europe, XD-11 in the USA, and the XD in Asia. The XD-5 is very similar, just lacking in the aperture window in the viewfinder, also the XD-5 seems to have a covering that's less susceptible to shrinkage than that of the XD-7/11.

Similarly, the X-500 is the same camera as the X-570, just marketed to different geographies under a different number.

BTW, I would agree with the prior posts that if you were to go with the Canon FD system, then the T-90 or the F-1n are better choices than the A-1. The A-1 has an issue with many cameras running out of lubrication of the Mirror box that is common among all Canon A-series bodies, that causes a wheezing/squeaking sound when the shutter is tripped, and unless this is remedied in short order, the cameras will soon jam up and require a major repair. I also happen to think that the A-1 ergonomics are clunky - the T-90 is much better in this regard, and the F-1n is a more reliable and rugged camera.

 

[Peter de Groot]

Ok I have decided not to opt for autofocus. I have that on my digital so if I want that I'll use digital. So I go for manual and oldstyle camera. So that leaves me with a lot of options. I'm not stuck on Canon....maybe I should buy a cheap pentax body since I have already two pentax lenses anyway. Think I''l keep on searching for the cheapest option. I'll let you guys know what I have bought. Thanks for all the input.

 

[Pumal]

If you go for Pentax; consider Spotmatic SP II, SP 1000. Also ME, ME Super and Super Program. As for lenses; I stick to Super-Multi-Coated Takumars:
50mm 1.4
55mm f/2
135mm f/3.5
etc

 

[dougjgreen]

Peter. are your Pentax lenses Bayonet mount, or screw mount?

If they are screw mount, there are tons of Pentax choices that are very inexpensive - but the key is to just get a fully working camera that can use current batteries for the meter, and that's not so easy.

The more modern Pentax bayonet mount cameras all use modern batteries. I really like the Pentax MX, because it is so small and light. The Pentax ME Super is also a good choice, and much easier to find.

 

[Peter de Groot]

The lenses are bajonet mount. I might go with an me super. I want to be able to choose the shutterspeed up to a 1000 of a second. Ah well I got some time to make a decision.

 

[darinwc]

Just my 2 cents.. The A-series bodies are so-so. While they have some nice features, they just dont have the same quality/elegance to them that a nikon FE or Olympus OM2 have.
The Canon F1, (and from what I hear) the EF, and FTb are much better cameras.
The FD lenses however, are top-notch and a bargain on todays market.

As far as the EOS system goes, I would imagine there are bargains to be had in the bodies. The lenses may be another story though if the digicam guys are snatching them up. I dont know I dont shoot EOS (yet).

 

[sangetsu]

It used to be that the Pentax K1000 was the all-around 35mm for photography students. But that was back when Nikon and Canon gear where much more expensive.

You simply cannot go wrong with a Canon FD kit. The camera bodies are cheap, and the lenses are dirt cheap. Not only are they cheap, but the variety of lenses available is insane.

I recently picked up an old F1, an A1, and 4 lenses for under $150. I found a motor drive for the F1 this week for only $30 more dollars. I've been carrying the F1 to work with me, and I'm enjoying the hell out of it.

The A1 is not so nice. It works well enough, but it does not have the same solid feel of the F1. On the other hand, you can get a working A1 with a good lens for $50 if you shop around.

The only other camera I would recommend would be the the Nikon FE. These can be had with a lens for less than $100. They are simple to use, durable, and fool-proof.

 

[andrewkirkby]

I have a full FD kit and it has cost far less than equivalent in EOS. In many cases the optical designs are pretty much the same in EOS EF mount and FD mount.

I actually prefer the feel of the FD cameras to the EOS gear. I work for Canon in Australia and will use either my F1n or A1 over an EOS 1n/v any time.

The type of meter you want will determine which camera you buy. Have a look at Canon Camera Musuem (www.canon.com/camera_museum) and if you have any questions please email me.

Andrew Kirkby
kirkby_andrew@canon.com.au

 

[ozphoto]

I had both the A series (AE1 Program & A1) and and F1. Yes the build quality of the A1 series were less than the F1, but then the F1 was a "pro" camera and built for the rigors of pro use.

Had I not had to go d****** for my job, I'd have stuck with these without question. Andrew is correct when he says you can pick up FD equipment for far less than EF - I cry at what i can get today for FD cameras! Had a lovely 300 f2.8 that I used on occasion; forget it in EF - too expensive and not worth the limited use I would get out of it now.

If you can get an F1 (even an original series one) I'd buy that, but a well looked after A1 and drive will also keep you going for years. Whichever you decide on, you'll enjoy film and all the nuances it has to offer.