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.
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).
![]()
.... Right now I'm wound up wondering if the Cubs can break their 108-year span not winning the Series.
Yaaay!!! They did it!!!
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.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.
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.![]()
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.
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.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.
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...
. The Nikon FA is comparable to the A-1 but its not as easy to see through and the grip is not as good.
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 guess I'm old school. I generally trust my mechanical cameras more than my electronic ones, based on my experiences with a bunch of different cameras.
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?
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.
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: ![]() |