Canon EF camera
-
A
- Thread starter colin wells
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale Nikkor 5cm f2 ltm
- Started by Gram Nylén
-
For Sale Durst Laborator L 184 LACON Condensor set
- Started by jbrianfoto
-
For Sale Durst Laborator L 184 Lamphouse and Bulb Adjustment Mechanism
- Started by jbrianfoto
-
For Sale Durst Laborator L184 accessories; VADAP tilting Baseplate
- Started by jbrianfoto
-
Free Mini Radio triggers: Light pix lab Flash Q
- Started by RoboRepublic
Forum statistics
EF is mechanical, tough camera like original F-1. Has shutter priority or manual. Can work without batteries.
A-1 is later, made out of cardboard, has microprocessor and P, A, S, M modes.
A-1 is later, made out of cardboard, has microprocessor and P, A, S, M modes.
Hi Theo, I think that you are being a bit dismissive of the A-1. The polycarbonate shell of the Canon A series cameras is probably stronger than the pressed and plated / painted brass shells used on most cameras up until the mid 70's. It won't easily dent and the black models didn't shed paint, or brass up without severe use.
The multi exposure modes gave plenty of options to the user although I mainly used shutter priority as I was coming from an AE-1. The breakthrough in materials and design of the A series cameras allowed lower manufacturing costs and thus lower prices to consumers. These cameras sold in the millions.
In general use, durability of the A series is very good. With the exception of the 'Canon squeak' caused by a dry flywheel in the damper on the mirror, the electronics, shutter and film transport are very robust. My AE-1 and A-1 have had one service each since new and still perform like new. Sadly many people mistreat their gear in terms of usage and storage. Witness the many shabby examples of all cameras that are being flogged off on e-Bay. In NZ we have a term for these neglected examples - 'Rolled, bowled and arseholed', (generally applied to cars which have been thrashed and crashed).
PS I stlll love my EF and F1-N.
OK - I may have used hyperbole. Right now I'm wound up wondering if the Cubs can break their 108-year span not winning the Series.
I don't have a horse in this race but, GO CUBS GO !!!!!!!!!
I have used my A-1 and AT-1 quite a bit on "The Street" and they seem to hold up rather well.Hi Theo, I think that you are being a bit dismissive of the A-1. The polycarbonate shell of the Canon A series cameras is probably stronger than the pressed and plated / painted brass shells used on most cameras up until the mid 70's. It won't easily dent and the black models didn't shed paint, or brass up without severe use.
The multi exposure modes gave plenty of options to the user although I mainly used shutter priority as I was coming from an AE-1. The breakthrough in materials and design of the A series cameras allowed lower manufacturing costs and thus lower prices to consumers. These cameras sold in the millions.
In general use, durability of the A series is very good. With the exception of the 'Canon squeak' caused by a dry flywheel in the d (generally applied to cars which have been thrashed and crashed).
Just my experience, but the whole Metal/Mechanical Camera thing gets over-blown at times.
Yaaay!!! They did it!!!
Geeze - that was tense. Never thought I'd live to see this day!
So, back to the topic. I can definitely see the appeal of the A-1: you've basically got all the modes of a fully configured F-1N in a smaller, lighter package. Also, unless you're a professional who may put thousands of rolls through the camera per year or someone who uses their camera in a challenging environment, I think the A-1 would last for a very long time.
As for the EF, which has less feature complexity and is a more rugged camera that preceded the A-1, its appeal to me is that very lack of feature complexity and its ruggedness. I love its display with the shutter speeds and aperture scale. I'm also fond of the all-manual FTb.
I have had a mint A1 for more than twenty years and although it's been utterly reliable I dislike it because it doesn't give me the feeling of confidence that my F series cameras do, in fact I've tried to give it to two members of my family and neither of them want it because of the potential D&P costs to them of using film rather than digital and it's not worth the trouble of selling because they sell for buttons on the open market these days. I have five Canon F1's and and EF and will probably never use the A1 again in this lifetime.
P.S I like heavy S.L.R.'s because due to the laws of inertia because you can hold a heavy camera more still at slow speeds than a lighter one.
Hi Theo, I think that you are being a bit dismissive of the A-1. The polycarbonate shell of the Canon A series cameras is probably stronger than the pressed and plated / painted brass shells used on most cameras up until the mid 70's. It won't easily dent and the black models didn't shed paint, or brass up without severe use.
The multi exposure modes gave plenty of options to the user although I mainly used shutter priority as I was coming from an AE-1. The breakthrough in materials and design of the A series cameras allowed lower manufacturing costs and thus lower prices to consumers. These cameras sold in the millions.
In general use, durability of the A series is very good. With the exception of the 'Canon squeak' caused by a dry flywheel in the damper on the mirror, the electronics, shutter and film transport are very robust. My AE-1 and A-1 have had one service each since new and still perform like new. Sadly many people mistreat their gear in terms of usage and storage. Witness the many shabby examples of all cameras that are being flogged off on e-Bay. In NZ we have a term for these neglected examples - 'Rolled, bowled and arseholed', (generally applied to cars which have been thrashed and crashed).
PS I stlll love my EF and F1-N.
+1
The A-1 is easier to use; on the EF the "on" switch is really annoying. If you don't turn it "on", the shutter locks and you can't take a picture, but if you turn it on, the battery drains relatively quickly.
Batteries last longer on the A-1.
The display on the A-1 is the most comfortable display i've seen in any camera and is clearer to see than the needles on the EF viewfinder.
The A-1 has the exposure compensation dial which is useful for the auto modes.
On the other hand on the EF you can do stop-down preview of DOF without having to do any special 'trick' afterwards to restore proper operation. And it has mirror-lock up, although i can bet that the shutter and mirror action of the A-1 is smoother. (I owned the A-1 as well)
My first camera was my dads A1 given to me in 1990. I still use it occasionally and tried and resold an EF. The A1 stayed in the barn since my pop gave it to me and because the EF was really heavy. The EF can fire with no batteries in hand held speeds where the A1 can only store your film in a light tight box once the battery is dead. They both require turning off the battery when not in use.
If you are happy with an A1, you'll be happy with a Ae-1 program unless you need Aperture Priority.
I also find the A1 viewfinder to be one of the best in terms of brightness and the wonderful LED readout. Nothing is easier to read in a lightweight manual film advance camera. I also love the ergonomics of the A1 over just about anything in the same form factor. Once yo uget into the EOS and autofocus era, ergonomics get better across the board.
I eventually went Nikon and the only thing I miss is the LED and ergonomics. The Nikon FA is comparable to the A-1 but its not as easy to see through and the grip is not as good.
If you are happy with an A1, you'll be happy with a Ae-1 program unless you need Aperture Priority.
I also find the A1 viewfinder to be one of the best in terms of brightness and the wonderful LED readout. Nothing is easier to read in a lightweight manual film advance camera. I also love the ergonomics of the A1 over just about anything in the same form factor. Once yo uget into the EOS and autofocus era, ergonomics get better across the board.
I eventually went Nikon and the only thing I miss is the LED and ergonomics. The Nikon FA is comparable to the A-1 but its not as easy to see through and the grip is not as good.
The A-Series Canons are getting on for 40 years old, and they've held up remarkably well. Apart from the well known Canon Cough - fixed with a screwdriver, a hypo and a little oil - the A-1 is pretty bomb proof. The A-Series main benefit is their lack of weight, especially the FD lenses, a real consideration if you're taking two or three bodies and a bunch of lenses. May lack the feel of classic metal cameras, but the negatives won't notice and you'll avoid a hernia.
I do not understand that argument of empty battery.
In that sense you also could argue that film photography is no good as once the film in the cassette is exposed you are done...
Most SLRs from the 70s/80s do not drain much current, batteries are tiny and light. Canon even added to the AE-1 a cup for a spare battery to be threaded onto the camera strap.
Trouble only may start with high drain as with winder or flash use or use in the strong cold.
But then I learn at Apug that many true mechanical cameras are not made for the cold either...
In that sense you also could argue that film photography is no good as once the film in the cassette is exposed you are done...
Most SLRs from the 70s/80s do not drain much current, batteries are tiny and light. Canon even added to the AE-1 a cup for a spare battery to be threaded onto the camera strap.
Trouble only may start with high drain as with winder or flash use or use in the strong cold.
But then I learn at Apug that many true mechanical cameras are not made for the cold either...
The A-1 was my second ever 35mm camera -- the AE-1 was my first. I bought it only about a year or so after buying the AE-1, so at the time I still didn't really know beans about photography. I used it in "P" most of the time. But fast forward another year or so and I was already becoming disillusioned. I was shooting slides almost exclusively by then and one of the problems I was experiencing was severe underexposure because of extraneous light sources that crept into the shots, ruining them. It was the "centerweighted" metering pattern of the A-1 that was at fault, and is, to this day, the number one thing I don't like about A-series Canons. But once one becomes aware of this problem, it's possible to do work-arounds so not as many shots are ruined. Canon finally wised up to this when they released the T-70, offering a partial area metering pattern -- similar to that of the original F-1 and available as one of the focusing screen choices with the New F-1.
But you know, I really got to hand it to Canon for designing such a rugged camera. The A-1 (and AE-1P, far as that goes) is an impressively durable machine. When I bought mine new I would have never guessed that so many A-1s would still be going strong over 30 years later (bought mine in 1983).
That original A-1 is long gone. I sold it when I switched systems for a while to Nikon. But over the years I've owned several. Currently I have just one -- a minty copy that works perfectly, mounted to a Motor Drive MA (one of Canon's two best motor drives, IMO). I also own a minty black AE-1P. I couldn't resist it. I think black AE-1Ps are very cool looking.
But you know what? If I had to choose between an A-1 and an EF, it would be a tough call. The fact that the A-1 has two more exposure modes doesn't bother me. Heck, the EF has mirror lock up. And while both have full-featured viewfinders, I don't regard one as being particularly better than the other (I'm not all that big of a fan of digital readouts. I prefer analog). The EF works from 1/2 sec to 1/1000 without batteries, the A-1 takes the Motor Drive MA, arguably Canon's second best motor drive. The EF is rugged and just simply good-looking. But then so is the A-1, on both counts. So I've done what any sensible lover of Canon FD would do. I added both to my collection. Why choose?
But you know, I really got to hand it to Canon for designing such a rugged camera. The A-1 (and AE-1P, far as that goes) is an impressively durable machine. When I bought mine new I would have never guessed that so many A-1s would still be going strong over 30 years later (bought mine in 1983).
That original A-1 is long gone. I sold it when I switched systems for a while to Nikon. But over the years I've owned several. Currently I have just one -- a minty copy that works perfectly, mounted to a Motor Drive MA (one of Canon's two best motor drives, IMO). I also own a minty black AE-1P. I couldn't resist it. I think black AE-1Ps are very cool looking.
But you know what? If I had to choose between an A-1 and an EF, it would be a tough call. The fact that the A-1 has two more exposure modes doesn't bother me. Heck, the EF has mirror lock up. And while both have full-featured viewfinders, I don't regard one as being particularly better than the other (I'm not all that big of a fan of digital readouts. I prefer analog). The EF works from 1/2 sec to 1/1000 without batteries, the A-1 takes the Motor Drive MA, arguably Canon's second best motor drive. The EF is rugged and just simply good-looking. But then so is the A-1, on both counts. So I've done what any sensible lover of Canon FD would do. I added both to my collection. Why choose?
Thanks for making me smile!
Exactly. The fact is batteries of that era fail so infrequently that the user has probably forgotten the last time they put one in. Compare that to digital cameras where people continually have a couple on charge. All cameras require "feeding" in some way. If A-series cameras were so bad, there wouldn't be thousands of them around four decades later. I never had a metering issue with mine, spot, centre weighted and average require different approaches, and if there's light creep through the viewfinder the A-1 has a shutter. Electronic shutters need adjustment much less frequently that mechanical types in my experience, and hold their speeds longer.
Wise words!
And it is ugly as hell. Easily the ugliest non-AF Nikon camera, ever.
I agree with blockend, my all mechanical cameras are more prone to having issues with shutter speeds, film advance, and are heavy, I upgraded from the F2 to F3, a lot of PJ at time would not fearful of the electronic shutter, the F3 never let me down. My current Minolta cameras include a 9000, 7000, over 30 years old and work flawlessly.
All mechanical devices will eventually need cleaning, lubrication, and adjustment. That is normal and to be expected. The good news is that it can be done. Cameras which depend on more than a few proprietary or rare electronic parts for essential operation will become unrepairable and thus inoperable within a few decades. Unless they are kept as mementos, their future is the dumpster.
On an unrelated thread, a comment was made that it is unreasonable to expect repairs could be made to an electronics-dependent Hasselblad 200-series camera which is 12 years out of production.
The problem isn't with electronics per se, but that the stock of proprietary or specialized components is available for a limited time and those who have the access to those components and the ability to do the repair are also limited.
On an unrelated thread, a comment was made that it is unreasonable to expect repairs could be made to an electronics-dependent Hasselblad 200-series camera which is 12 years out of production.
The problem isn't with electronics per se, but that the stock of proprietary or specialized components is available for a limited time and those who have the access to those components and the ability to do the repair are also limited.
Last edited:
Hi Theo, I think that you are being a bit dismissive of the A-1. The polycarbonate shell of the Canon A series cameras is probably stronger than the pressed and plated / painted brass shells used on most cameras up until the mid 70's. It won't easily dent and the black models didn't shed paint, or brass up without severe use.
The multi exposure modes gave plenty of options to the user although I mainly used shutter priority as I was coming from an AE-1. The breakthrough in materials and design of the A series cameras allowed lower manufacturing costs and thus lower prices to consumers. These cameras sold in the millions.
In general use, durability of the A series is very good. With the exception of the 'Canon squeak' caused by a dry flywheel in the damper on the mirror, the electronics, shutter and film transport are very robust. My AE-1 and A-1 have had one service each since new and still perform like new. Sadly many people mistreat their gear in terms of usage and storage. Witness the many shabby examples of all cameras that are being flogged off on e-Bay. In NZ we have a term for these neglected examples - 'Rolled, bowled and arseholed', (generally applied to cars which have been thrashed and crashed).
PS I stlll love my EF and F1-N.
I want metal camera and not plastic. It's not about strength. It's about nicer.
For me it depends on the camera.
Electronics can be very very reliable if they are protected against humidity.
Mechanics can be very very reliable if kept away from dirt and salt and well lubricated.
My city is extremely humid. Humidity has broken the metering circuits of two Nikon F3 cameras i know (one is mine). While i've never found a Nikon FE or Canon AE-1 with bad electronics.
Mechanical cameras that went to the beach or were submerged in salty water and not dissasembled afterwards, will be doomed.
So would electronic ones, right?
Right, but there is no slow-speed governor on electronic cameras. And that, arguably, is the most sensitive mechanical part on a mechanical camera, the most likely to go out of alignment.
The same time the AE-1 is very susceptible to sand...
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |