Canon EOS 1 or 3

[131802]

I was ready to bite on an EOS 3 but then my all-digital neighbor mentioned that she once owned an EOS 1 and had been quite happy with it. Does anyone around here have a recommendation regarding the EOS 1 vs the EOS 3? They look to be about the same price on the used market. I'll be shooting mostly Velvia, with some TMax 100, no flash photography. I have the 200mm F2.8 EF lens, and will be looking to add something in the medium-wide range. Is there any reason to favor one or the other of these cameras?

Mark

 

[haris]

EOS 3 in newer camera (newer technology) have newer processing chip (for mettering and autofocus, more sensitive cross focus point(s) with slower lenses - 5,6), newer shutter mechanism, it is said it has one of if not the best mettering among EOS cameras, smaller and lighter than EOS 1, I have one and I am happy with it.

On the other hand, EOS 1 is workhorse, it is supposed to be more weather (rain) ressistant than EOS 3, and it suppose to be better built. I didn't used it, but I have photojournalist friends who used it, and were happy with it.

EOS 3 has more bells and whistles, like eye controlled focus (linked to each of 45 focus points ot to groupped focus points), 45 AF points (of course you can reduce that to 11 or to only 1, or to groups, or... ), up to 8 point spot mettering, spot metering connected to one of 11 eye controlled focus points, etc...

Best is: download and read manual for both cameras and have in mind that 1 is heavier workhorse, probablly better built and weather resistance, and 3 is smaller, lighter and more modern.

And, there is more than 10 years difference between 1 and 3, that is if you go for EOS 1 you will get more than 10 years older camera for same money. That don't have to be bad, but it probably worked more, older and more used mechanic in it (more films through it), more lenses on and off camera (lens mount wearing)...

People I know who have EOS 1 wouldn't change it for EOS 3, and I wouldn't change my EOS 3 for EOS 1.

Good luck

 

[131802]

Thanks, Haris; especially for the good advice on reading the manuals.

Mark

 

[ath]

There are three different Models of EOS1, the original one, the 1N and the current 1V.
Personally, if you accept the style and electronis of the EOS (I do) I would go for the 3 unless you need the slightly faster sync speed or the 100% viewfinder.
The 3 is much more versatile than the 1 and 1N and only slightly below the 1V.
The weather resistance of the 3 is said to be the level of the 1N; the 1V is improved.

 

[131802]

Thanks Andreas; I'm definitely leaning toward the 3, especially after reading the manuals. The eye-controlled focusing might be too much of a trick for an old dog like me to learn, but it sounds interesting and I think I'm going to give it a try. Thanks for your advice.

Mark

 

[Gary Holliday]

Bear in mind that the EOS 1 was a professional camera and as it's secondhand, it is likely to have seen some heavy use over the years. I chose the EOS 3 over the IV because it was much lighter and was swayed by the new focusing system (with a 2.8 L lens of course).

 

[thomsonrc]

I bought an EOS 3 just a few weeks ago. Its a well built and pretty heavy camera (weighs more than my medium format Mamiya 6), so if the EOS 1 is much heavier I would think about if you want to carry that weight around. I found the eye control totally unworkable, calibration proved impossible for me, but you dont have to use it.

Ritchie

 

[Neil Souch]

Hi,

With EOS 35mm we shoot with S/H EOS 1ns although I also own a new (some years ago) EOS 3. Whilst I like the EOS 3 we now use the EOS 1ns for everything 35mm by preference. The reasons being they are are far more rugged (body built of brass I believe and not plastic) for out door / landscape work and have a fair degree of water proofing. The 1n is affordable at about £120 - £150 for a good used body on the S/H UK market. If you hunt about you can find a privately owned one quite easily as dealers don't want them on trade-ins for DI kit. The build quality on the 1n is far better than the 3 (especially inside on the film transport area) and you don't have to worry about the eye focus of the 3, which I find impossinle to use, and which of course was the 3's main selling feature (although it can be turned off). I would not recommend going for an EOS 1, unless you are buying a mint one from a known source, as they are quite old now and I think your money would be better put into a 1n which is in effect a much updated EOS 1 and most of the updates are desireable. With the weight issue, yes, the 1n is heavier but TBH we do not find this a problem, I often carry a 1n + lenses in my bag alnong with a Hasselblad CM + lenses + tripod on long walks and my wife also carries 3 EOS 1n bodies + lenses i+ tripod in her back pack and we are retired!! If you are only going to have one body and a few lenses to worry about the differece would be hardly felt once on your back.

I hope this helps ?

Cheers,

Neil.

 

[ath]

Good information regarding comparism of the bodies is found here: http://www.chem.helsinki.fi/~toomas/photo/canon-intro.html and here: http://photonotes.org/reviews/1-1N-3-1V/

 

[viczig]

I can't speak to the 3 but I had a 1 and loved it. It was built like a tank, pretty much weather proof and a joy to use especially if you have a Canon digital EOS. I'm sorry I got rid of it.

Regards,

Vic

 

[131802]

Thanks everyone for your opinions. I don't think the weight difference is much of a factor for me -- I regularly carry a Bronica S. Weatherproofing would be nice: I live in rainy northwestern USA. That some of the EOS 1 models are getting on in years is a bit of a worry. Decisions, decisions!

Mark