Canon brought out laser cut screens with the F1n they all have the "L" prefix on them before the type
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Canon-F-1...045765?hash=item4b1792d445:g:~VIAAOSwY3BZGg9X
Canon brought out laser cut screens with the F1n they all have the "L" prefix on them before the typeThe laser mat screen upgrade is that a Canon fitting or aftermarket
It is confusing.
First generation = F-1
Second generation (actually a tweak) = F-1n (small n)
Third generation (brand new camera) = F-1N (capitol N), or New F-1.
Jim B.
That's true Flavio, but these are the generally accepted descriptions amongst F1 users nowadays.But to be fair, Canon didn't invent the "F-1N" moniker. That camera was always(?) called "Canon New F-1" on the advertisements, user manuals and boxes.
F2s is CDs with a 2 led display
F2sb is SBC with 3 led display
F2as is an ai coupled sb
The generally accepted designation of the improved version of the original F1 is F1n,(lower case n). and the New F1 F1N (upper case N).
That's true Flavio, but these are the generally accepted descriptions amongst F1 users nowadays.
This is all true, it's just "custom and practice".This is probably a continuation of the designation "N" used by Canon with their updated FTb-N in 1973 -> http://global.canon/en/c-museum/product/film87.html
No doubt there are localized pockets of resistance . . .
Incidentally, none of the instruction manuals - and the brochures I have for these, identify even Canons "N" or "NEW" designation and of course none of the bodies have these designations on them.
BTW, there was even yet another variation called the F-1 High Speed Motor Drive Camera -> http://global.canon/en/c-museum/product/film82.html
I wonder why Canon didn't just continue the use of Canonflex instead of using the "F-1" designation then stalling there . . .
I didn't know they were Dutch. I spent half my childhood accompanying my mother and sister round the clothing department of C&A modes. How can two women look at one rail of clothing for half an hour (and do the same for an entire department store)?There used to be a Dutch clothing retailer in the U.K called C & A where my wife used to buy her underwear, and she could always check the label on her panties to she had them on the right way round
Did you ever take them along when you looked at _________ (fill in the blank) at your local camera store?I didn't know they were Dutch. I spent half my childhood accompanying my mother and sister round the clothing department of C&A modes. How can two women look at one rail of clothing for half an hour (and do the same for an entire department store)
Someone asked further up the threadWTF does that have to do with Canon?
I always call mine the "New F-1" to avoid confusion.
I like the improved interchangeable screens and metering options on the New F-1. I usually use the SB (spot metering with the split-image rangefinder spot) or SK (spot metering, bright laser matte optimized for long lenses).
Nowadays, they're all relatively cheap, so it's not so hard to own multiple FD bodies. The main attraction of the F-1 and F-1n, or the EF is the mirror lockup, but that said, even with my FD 600/4.5, I didn't see any difference in resolution when I tested it using an EF with MLU and my New F-1 some years ago, so I eventually sold the EF body. Canon claimed that the improved mirror vibration damping mechanism of the New F-1 made MLU unnecessary, but I still wouldn't mind having the option.
The company has been in business in Holland since the seventeenth century.I didn't know they were Dutch. I spent half my childhood accompanying my mother and sister round the clothing department of C&A modes. How can two women look at one rail of clothing for half an hour (and do the same for an entire department store)?
What sold me on MLU back when I was still using A-series Canons was an article I read in Modern Photography magazine back in about 1984 or so. They tested the New F-1 against a Canon with MLU, sorry I don't recall which one, shooting at a subject at 1/60 second. I don't recall any more specifics than that. But the images told the tale. The F-1's was noticeably degraded due to camera shake, whereas the Canon with MLU's was clear.
Circumstances should be considered. Also, mirror bounce has a different effect with certain shutter speeds... So both David Goldfarb & you can be right: at 1/250 and 1/4 for example there could be zero effect, but at 1/60 and 1/30, max effect.
Circumstances should be considered. Also, mirror bounce has a different effect with certain shutter speeds... So both David Goldfarb & you can be right: at 1/250 and 1/4 for example there could be zero effect, but at 1/60 and 1/30, max effect.
This is true, but I also recall testing it at the relevant speeds--around 1/15-1/60 sec.--and it didn't make a difference for me. There are other factors like the condition of the camera and the tripod system that could also be important.
As for in-camera spot metering, indeed, you've got to be careful where you point the spot, but eventually you can get in the habit of thinking where you want to place the exposure, metering, setting the exposure, and composing. I don't usually find it necessary to meter every shot. If there's a situation like moving clouds, I might have one setting for full sun and one for cloud cover or one for sun and one for shade, and then I can meter again if something else arises, and I get more consistent results than I would in any kind of auto mode or otherwise adjusting exposure for every shot.
Just got my F-1N back from a repair/CLA. It is a joy to use.
The Canon Corporation said that they omitted mirror lock in the New F1 and T90 because the mirror was so well damped in was unnecessary.This is true, but I also recall testing it at the relevant speeds--around 1/15-1/60 sec.--and it didn't make a difference for me. There are other factors like the condition of the camera and the tripod system that could also be important.
As for in-camera spot metering, indeed, you've got to be careful where you point the spot, but eventually you can get in the habit of thinking where you want to place the exposure, metering, setting the exposure, and composing. I don't usually find it necessary to meter every shot. If there's a situation like moving clouds, I might have one setting for full sun and one for cloud cover or one for sun and one for shade, and then I can meter again if something else arises, and I get more consistent results than I would in any kind of auto mode or otherwise adjusting exposure for every shot.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?