Canon F1n vs. Nikon F2? Really, is one better than the other?

9

Theo Sulphate said:

Welcome back. While you were gone, I got this:

View attachment 198336
View attachment 198337

Click to expand...

I hope you got the rewind coupler cover with the camera because you can't use the camera without the motor drive without it, and with the twelve AA batteries in the drive, it's a boat anchor, to carry about. ( it's sometimes stored in the battery chamber of the drive together with the other screws for the camera base )

benjiboy said:

9
I hope you got the rewind coupler cover with the camera ...

Click to expand...

Yes, all is good.

Theo Sulphate said:

Yes, all is good.

Click to expand...

I hope Theo you have as many years of pleasure out of this F1 as I have from mine, it's truly one of the greatest film S.L.R.'s ever manufactured.

benjiboy said:

I hope Theo you have as many years of pleasure out of this F1 as I have from mine, it's truly one of the greatest film S.L.R.'s ever manufactured.

Click to expand...

Thank you for the kind thoughts, Ben. My appreciation of the quality and capabilities of this camera has increased considerably. Had I been able to afford one when new, I probably would've stopped buying cameras. I enjoy the Canon EF as well - it's surprising how comparatively little information there is on the internet about it.

Theo Sulphate said:

Thank you for the kind thoughts, Ben. My appreciation of the quality and capabilities of this camera has increased considerably. Had I been able to afford one when new, I probably would've stopped buying cameras. I enjoy the Canon EF as well - it's surprising how comparatively little information there is on the internet about it.

Click to expand...

The EF is very intriguing, I might get one instead of an F1.

E. von Hoegh said:

The EF is very intriguing, I might get one instead of an F1.

Click to expand...

Don't. I owned one. I even know its internals. The F-1 is better. For starters, the shutter lock/on-off is annoying as hell, and you need to use it otherwise battery consumption gets high. This is the worst defect of all and causes misses shots since camera can't be left in a "ready" state. The Nikkormat EL has a similar annoyance but at least the switch is quick to operate. (EL was its direct competitor.)

Next, manual mode is as agricultural as in the Canon A-1. No match needle, nothing.

But you have AE lock to rescue you, right? Yeah but the button is placed in the worst place ever, ergonomically. At least the Nikkormal EL has it on a good place.

Shutter in the F-1 is smoother: a jewel-like horizontal foil shutter, versus the good (but unremarkable) Copal on the EF.

Plus: metering is more sensitive and faster acting than the one on the F-1 and F-1n. It is also cool and the shutter speed dial is well located.

I went to a great trip wirh the F-1N and the EF. You know which camera was the better travel companion.

Theo Sulphate said:

Thank you for the kind thoughts, Ben. My appreciation of the quality and capabilities of this camera has increased considerably. Had I been able to afford one when new, I probably would've stopped buying cameras. I enjoy the Canon EF as well - it's surprising how comparatively little information there is on the internet about it.

Click to expand...

I worked ay a pro.camera dealer selling them in 1981when the New F1 was current, but I couldn't afford one ( they cost about £900, $1268 U.S.D. for the AE body only ) which was a great deal of money in 1981.

flavio81 said:

Don't. I owned one. I even know its internals. The F-1 is better. For starters, the shutter lock/on-off is annoying as hell, and you need to use it otherwise battery consumption gets high. This is the worst defect of all and causes misses shots since camera can't be left in a "ready" state. The Nikkormat EL has a similar annoyance but at least the switch is quick to operate. (EL was its direct competitor.)

Next, manual mode is as agricultural as in the Canon A-1. No match needle, nothing.

But you have AE lock to rescue you, right? Yeah but the button is placed in the worst place ever, ergonomically. At least the Nikkormal EL has it on a good place.

Shutter in the F-1 is smoother: a jewel-like horizontal foil shutter, versus the good (but unremarkable) Copal on the EF.

Plus: metering is more sensitive and faster acting than the one on the F-1 and F-1n. It is also cool and the shutter speed dial is well located.

I went to a great trip wirh the F-1N and the EF. You know which camera was the better travel companion.

Click to expand...

Sounds like a challenge! I love oddball stuff, I sometimes hunt deer with a m1911 Schmidt- Rubin rifle - google it, I can't post links.

flavio81 said:

Don't. I owned one. I even know its internals. The F-1 is better. For starters, the shutter lock/on-off is annoying as hell, and you need to use it otherwise battery consumption gets high. This is the worst defect of all and causes misses shots since camera can't be left in a "ready" state. The Nikkormat EL has a similar annoyance but at least the switch is quick to operate. (EL was its direct competitor.)

Next, manual mode is as agricultural as in the Canon A-1. No match needle, nothing.

But you have AE lock to rescue you, right? Yeah but the button is placed in the worst place ever, ergonomically. At least the Nikkormal EL has it on a good place.

Shutter in the F-1 is smoother: a jewel-like horizontal foil shutter, versus the good (but unremarkable) Copal on the EF.

Plus: metering is more sensitive and faster acting than the one on the F-1 and F-1n. It is also cool and the shutter speed dial is well located.

I went to a great trip wirh the F-1N and the EF. You know which camera was the better travel companion.

Click to expand...

The Copal Square shutter on the E.F. is remarkable Flavio because it's the only time that The Canon Corporation ever used a shutter that they didn't manufacture..

E. von Hoegh said:

Sounds like a challenge! I love oddball stuff, I sometimes hunt deer with a m1911 Schmidt- Rubin rifle - google it, I can't post links.

Click to expand...

The Swiss Schmidt-Rubin and its highly praised cartridge I don't consider oddball; I'd see them all the time at shows. An Egyptian Hakim, that's oddball. Based on the gas operated semiauto Swedish Ag m/42 with the wonderful 6.5x55, the Hakim used the 7.92x57 (8mm Mauser) and it had a reputation for literally severing one's thumb.

As for the EF, I find it charming. Yes, unfortunately it does require two batteries and has the annoying switch Flavio mentioned. Yet, it is so much fun to use and its build quality is high.

Theo Sulphate said:

The Swiss Schmidt-Rubin and its highly praised cartridge I don't consider oddball; I'd see them all the time at shows. An Egyptian Hakim, that's oddball. Based on the gas operated semiauto Swedish Ag m/42 with the wonderful 6.5x55, the Hakim used the 7.92x57 (8mm Mauser) and it had a reputation for literally severing one's thumb.

As for the EF, I find it charming. Yes, unfortunately it does require two batteries and has the annoying switch Flavio mentioned. Yet, it is so much fun to use and its build quality is high.

Click to expand...

Theo Sulphate said:

The Swiss Schmidt-Rubin and its highly praised cartridge I don't consider oddball; I'd see them all the time at shows. An Egyptian Hakim, that's oddball. Based on the gas operated semiauto Swedish Ag m/42 with the wonderful 6.5x55, the Hakim used the 7.92x57 (8mm Mauser) and it had a reputation for literally severing one's thumb.

As for the EF, I find it charming. Yes, unfortunately it does require two batteries and has the annoying switch Flavio mentioned. Yet, it is so much fun to use and its build quality is high.

Click to expand...

I have a Hakim as well, although I have trouble seeing the thumb severance, you need to keep your left hand well forward, the Hakim has an open gas blowback system, and if your left digits get near the front of the bolt carrier, it's very unpleasant.
The m1911 is fity odd inches long, 31" bbl, heavy, and mine shoots 1 3/8" groups at 100 yds with Norma 180s and the service sights. Made 1915.

Me, give me a Garand or an M-1A (even better) any day over all that foreign stuff. Except the British Enfields.(No.1 Mk III, No.4 MK I, No.5 Mk 1) Dunno why exactly, but I love those old things.

As I mentioned in a previous post in this thread, I have two of Canon's original F-1s -- F-1ns actually and a New F-1, plus I have three EFs. Never mind why, I just do. The original F-1, especially the second version, aka F-1n, is my all-time favorite 35mm camera. Up against it, I consider its contemporary, the EF, to be somewhat of a novelty. If Canon would have had just a bit more foresight (or at least different foresight because the AE-1 and all subsequent A-series cameras got the EF's metering pattern unfortunately), they would have included a fully adjustable manual mode. But they didn't, so one has the annoying chore while in manual mode of having to set the aperture to what the camera "thinks" is correct exposure -- except often it's not because of the way its meter meters a scene. Which is not the way the F-1 and FTb do, a vastly superior method. Nope, Canon decided to go with a "centerweighted averaging" method instead. Its chief drawback is that it isn't centerweighted enough, such that it will overreact to bright light sources that might creep into the scene, which will result in under exposure.

So when I'm out shooting with my EF, this is one thing I'm really watching out for. I kinda like the two readouts it has. The only FD camera to offer two readouts until theT90 came along, and even its second readout wasn't active much of the time.

cooltouch said:

. If Canon would have had just a bit more foresight (or at least different foresight because the AE-1 and all subsequent A-series cameras got the EF's metering pattern unfortunately), they would have included a fully adjustable manual mode. But they didn't, so one has the annoying chore while in manual mode of having to set the aperture to what the camera "thinks" is correct exposure --

Click to expand...

Hello my friend Mr. Fresh Tactile Sensation,

The reason is the following. Here comes the science.

The A-1 (and AE-1) are shutter priority. Thus, they are Electric-eye cameras. Thus, diaphragm should be set by the camera. The method used in the A-1/AE-1, is to -at the time of exposure- let the diaphragm start closing (this happens very fast), which means the aperture actuation lever (FD mount) will start rotating quickly. So there is a sensor that senses the position of such lever. As soon as this position matches the desired position, the lever is stopped and the exposure is started -- at the correct aperture**

So, in theory the A-1/AE-1 could sense the position of the aperture ring as well, and thus implement perfect manual operation indicating the actual aperture value (like in the F-1N). HOWEVER, for the AE operation to work, such lever needs to either be operated by a motor or to be "charged" (operated by a spring). The latter is the solution of the A-1/AE-1. When you are in manual mode on the A-1/AE-1, and you press the stop-down button, the stop-down operation discharges the lever spring and thus subsequent AE operation is impossible. Thus, on the A-1 you see an "EEEEEE" display and the camera locks, until you perform the special reset procedure, which effectively charges (winds) the lever spring.

This means that New-F1-like manual exposure on the A-1/AE-1 would require, first, to discharge this spring, and as a result, if the user wanted to return to AE operation, inevitably an EEEEEE status would follow.

In the New F-1, as you know, shutter priority is only available if you have a motor/winder installed. Now the reason is evident: The aperture lever is now acted upon by the motor, not by a simple spring. So no problem at all by changing between Tv priority mode and manual priority mode.

This, also is the reason you require a motor/winder to have shutter-priority AE on the F-1N. It is not because of "intentional crippling of functions by Canon" as Ken Rockwell wrote on its website.

cooltouch said:

except often it's not because of the way its meter meters a scene. Which is not the way the F-1 and FTb do, a vastly superior method. Nope, Canon decided to go with a "centerweighted averaging" method instead. Its chief drawback is that it isn't centerweighted enough, such that it will overreact to bright light sources that might creep into the scene, which will result in under exposure

Click to expand...

Well, i have Spotmatics which have averaging meter, and I can also get proper exposure. I agree that the Partial method is the best, but i don't find the "centerweighted averaging" method any problem. I've used the A-1 in many challenging situations with no problem as long as you compensate exactly as the (nicely illustrated) A-1 manual tells you.

** This is exactly the same method used in many Nikon shutter-priority cameras like the FG or FA, and the same method used in many Pentax shutter-priority/program cameras like the P30 or Super Program. The difference is that on these cameras there is an outer lever that senses the position of the aperture ring setting, while the aperture itself is set by directly manipulating the aperture actuator. Which is a far less precise method of automatically setting aperture, since the travel of this actuator is very short (compared to the wide travel of the aperture actuator lever on the FD mount).

The FD mount, thus, has a separate lever for closing the diaphragm vs the lever for actuating the diaphragm. On Pentax and Nikon lenses, this is the same lever. Don't know about Olympus OM since i never cared for that system.

flavio81 said:

The A-1 (and AE-1) are shutter priority. Thus, they are Electric-eye cameras. Thus, diaphragm should be set by the camera. The method used in the A-1/AE-1, is to -at the time of exposure- let the diaphragm start closing (this happens very fast), which means the aperture actuation lever (FD mount) will start rotating quickly. So there is a sensor that senses the position of such lever. As soon as this position matches the desired position, the lever is stopped and the exposure is started -- at the correct aperture**

Click to expand...

But what you're describing is basically sorta true of any full aperture metering camera. That is, the camera "knows" how far it's supposed to stop down the lens and that the lens isn't stopped down until the moment of exposure. Actually with an FD lens, you have a lever that is moved as the aperture ring is rotated and a corresponding lever inside the body (visible on the right side of the camera's mount opening) is moved in turn so the camera knows at what aperture the lens is set to (even though it's still wide open). There are no sensors! This "preset" lever, if you will, restricts the amount of stopping down the stop down lever can do. If it's set halfway through its arc, that stop down lever is going to stop the lens's aperture down only halfway. The lever that actually stops down the lens remains in the "open" position until the stop-down lever in the camera pushes it down (it's actually a sideways motion with an FD camera) at the time of exposure. And yes, it happens very fast. With the lens removed from an FD camera, you can watch that lever down at the base of the camera mount move very rapidly from right to left to right again when you depress the shutter button.

And, at any rate, what you're describing isn't what happens with an FD camera when it's set to shutter priority. In shutter priority, the lens is set to "A" (or sometimes a small circle), which tells the camera by means of that same "preset" lever that moves when the aperture ring moves that the camera has auto control of the lens and can set the aperture wherever it wants. This "preset" lever can move back and forth for the complete range of the lens's aperture values. Because the aperture is set to "A" it has complete freedom of movement. When the lens is not set to "A" this lever can still move freely in one direction, but it is stopped cold in the other direction, which indicates the aperture setting on the lens. But there's no such restriction to its movements when the lens is set to "A". It has to be this way so that the camera can move it to wherever it thinks it should be so that it will control the degree of iris closure, which is still done by the stop down levers in the camera and the lens during exposure.

So, in theory the A-1/AE-1 could sense the position of the aperture ring as well, and thus implement perfect manual operation indicating the actual aperture value (like in the F-1N). HOWEVER, for the AE operation to work, such lever needs to either be operated by a motor or to be "charged" (operated by a spring). The latter is the solution of the A-1/AE-1. When you are in manual mode on the A-1/AE-1, and you press the stop-down button, the stop-down operation discharges the lever spring and thus subsequent AE operation is impossible. Thus, on the A-1 you see an "EEEEEE" display and the camera locks, until you perform the special reset procedure, which effectively charges (winds) the lever spring.

Click to expand...

Wrong again. The stop down lever on the exterior of the camera body "charges" the stop down lever on the base of the lens, not the lever that's telling the camera what the aperture is set to. And AE is impossible (on the AE-1 at least) because the lens cannot be set to "A" in stop-down mode. It's blocked. And why would you want to set it to "A" anyway, since you're controlling exposure by moving the aperture ring? Actually, with the AE-1 in stopped down mode, this is the closest you'll get to having the meter detect both aperture and shutter speed settings. Kind of primitive in that respect, but it works for what it is -- kind of like an old Pentax Spotmatic. Oh, and by the way, with the A-1, you still have auto exposure when the body's stop down lever is engaged. On the A-1, it's called "Stopped Down AE." When you set the lens to an aperture value and push in the stop down lever on the body, the camera takes over. Even if you have the camera set to Program or any shutter speed you like, with the A-1 in Stopped Down AE, the aperture value you've selected will determine the shutter speed that will be used. At least with the AE-1, you still have freedom over shutter speeds, so you can over or under expose if you want. The only way you can do it on the A-1 is to dial in some Exposure Compensation.

This means that New-F1-like manual exposure on the A-1/AE-1 would require, first, to discharge this spring, and as a result, if the user wanted to return to AE operation, inevitably an EEEEEE status would follow.

Click to expand...

You know, I've been using the A-1 on and off for about 35 years, and I have never once been able to get it to display this EEEEE you're talking about. And I just gave mine a workout right now to see if I could. Shoot. No luck!

In the New F-1, as you know, shutter priority is only available if you have a motor/winder installed. Now the reason is evident: The aperture lever is now acted upon by the motor, not by a simple spring. So no problem at all by changing between Tv priority mode and manual priority mode.

This, also is the reason you require a motor/winder to have shutter-priority AE on the F-1N. It is not because of "intentional crippling of functions by Canon" as Ken Rockwell wrote on its website.

Click to expand...

Well, I'll take your word for it with respect to the New F-1, but it's a completely different animal from the A-series Canons. Oh and by the way! I need to mention this, since you've given your reasons why the A-series Canons don't have the aperture connected to a meter readout -- the Canon AT-1, which debuted in 1978, if I'm not mistaken (same year as the A-1) is a totally completely manual exposure only camera. Canon decided to put together this little gem so that film students would buy it instead of an AE-1 and then get all frustrated because of its "crippled" nature when in manual mode. The AT-1 is, in fact, the ONLY amateur-orientated Canon FD camera since the FTb that has a meter that responds to aperture settings (ignoring stop down metering of course). The AV-1 doesn't count because it has no manual mode and the user has no control over shutter speeds at all. So it was possible for Canon to add this feature into at least one of its A-series cameras. Too bad they didn't feel the need to add it to the T90 -- now that was a wrong-headed oversight, imho.

Well, i have Spotmatics which have averaging meter, and I can also get proper exposure. I agree that the Partial method is the best, but i don't find the "centerweighted averaging" method any problem. I've used the A-1 in many challenging situations with no problem as long as you compensate exactly as the (nicely illustrated) A-1 manual tells you.

Click to expand...

I don't think the manual went far enough. All it does is explain how to use that button on the side of the mount for an instant sort of exposure compensation -- and you better hope it's enough. Well it does have exposure compensation settings on that dial on the left, but honestly, when's the last time you used exposure compensation? I still think that Canon's metering method found on the original F-1 and the FTb was just about perfect. You have a central rectangle that occupies about 12% of the image area. This is the only area in the entire viewfinder that is metered. You could be shining a laser at the camera, and as long as it didn't enter that rectangle, the camera wouldn't know it even existed. I got so used to that rectangle, I could turn the camera this way or that, in effect, averaging the scene to determine an ideal exposure. I tended to think in terms of 18% gray when I used these cameras, because that would give me best exposure. I still do this with any camera I have that uses partial metering. When I bought my New F-1, one of the very first things I did with it was to by a Partial viewing screen. With my digitals, one of the first things I did with them was to set the meter to "Partial." With a partial screen I'm never caught by surprise from an errant light source that would cause underexposure.

You know, Nikon came up with just about a perfect averaging method with most all of their cameras' meters that were made from the mid-70s onward. 60-40 metering, with 60% emphasis occurring inside a largish circle visible in the viewfinder and 40% outside of it. Nikon stuck with that for years. They tightened it up on the F3 to 80-20 though. My reasoning as to why they did was they figured pros who were shooting slide film, with its very narrow exposure latitude, would get a greater percentage of correctly exposed shots than if they went with their 60-40 pattern. I don't know if that was their actual motive behind it, but based on personal experience with the F3 and shooting slides with the camera set to "A" I had very few shots where perfect exposure was missed. So I became a big fan of 80-20 metering in pretty short order -- cuz I shot slides only back then. Very little B&W and when I did, it was almost always medium format.

cooltouch said:

...
So when I'm out shooting with my EF, this is one thing I'm really watching out for. I kinda like the two readouts it has. The only FD camera to offer two readouts until theT90 came along, and even its second readout wasn't active much of the time.

Click to expand...

Eh? The F-1N shows aperture and shutter speed simultaneously, although,depending on configuration and mode, the contents of the bar scale and the contents of the simple window change.

Oops, you're right about the F-1N. I have one, but it's still new to me and I haven't used it much. The F-1N's readout is what I wish the EF's would have been. Oh well, the EF is what it is, and I have had fun using it, believe it or don't.

cooltouch said:

But what you're describing is basically sorta true of any full aperture metering camera. That is, the camera "knows" how far it's supposed to stop down the lens and that the lens isn't stopped down until the moment of exposure. Actually with an FD lens, you have a lever that is moved as the aperture ring is rotated and a corresponding lever inside the body (visible on the right side of the camera's mount opening) is moved in turn so the camera knows at what aperture the lens is set to (even though it's still wide open). There are no sensors!

Click to expand...

CoolTouch,

Note: For reference througout my post please open: This image

This is exactly what i am describing, we are just using other words. The "lever that is moved as the aperture ring is rotated" is what I am referring to (Canon's slang: "Aperture signal lever") , this one couples to the corresponding lever inside the camera ("aperture signal coupling lever"), and in the A-1 and AE-1 this lever DOES have a position sensor or "encoder" in the camera. This sensor is a wiper with a gray code pattern which gives the camera's CPU the instantaneous position of the lever, digitally. When shooting at shutter priority mode, this lever falls down, and when the instantaneous position is what the camera desires, then this aperture signal lever's movement is frozen and the rest of the exposure cycle is triggered, which includes moving the "lever that actually stops down the lens" (Canon's slang: "Automatic aperture lever").

cooltouch said:

And, at any rate, what you're describing isn't what happens with an FD camera when it's set to shutter priority. In shutter priority, the lens is set to "A" (or sometimes a small circle), which tells the camera by means of that same "preset" lever that moves when the aperture ring moves that the camera has auto control of the lens and can set the aperture wherever it wants. This "preset" lever can move back and forth for the complete range of the lens's aperture values. Because the aperture is set to "A" it has complete freedom of movement. When the lens is not set to "A" this lever can still move freely in one direction, but it is stopped cold in the other direction, which indicates the aperture setting on the lens. But there's no such restriction to its movements when the lens is set to "A". It has to be this way so that the camera can move it to wherever it thinks it should be so that it will control the degree of iris closure, which is still done by the stop down levers in the camera and the lens during exposure.

Click to expand...

Yes, I know, there is no contradiction with what I wrote. But the part i'm adding is the following:
The aperture signal lever is operated on the camera by the "aperture signal coupling lever". On the AE and AE-1, all this mechanism is spring powered so if the "aperture signal coupling lever" is moved outside the initial position (like, for example, when switching the lens out of the A position, setting an aperture value on the lens and then stopping down the lens), there is no way for the camera to reset the position of the "aperture signal coupling lever" by its own means.

So what does this mean? This will be more evident below, in my next replies.

cooltouch said:

Wrong again. The stop down lever on the exterior of the camera body "charges" the stop down lever on the base of the lens, not the lever that's telling the camera what the aperture is set to. And AE is impossible (on the AE-1 at least) because the lens cannot be set to "A" in stop-down mode.

Click to expand...

You're not getting my point. And part in bold is wrong -- more on this later.

But first, What I am trying to explain?

I'm trying to explain: Why, on the A-1 and AE-1, Canon chose not to implement a decent manual exposure mode. "Decent" as in "the camera knows what aperture are you selecting, and thus can compare it with the meter's preferred aperture and tell you if you're OK or not.

Read on, more follows.

cooltouch said:

You know, I've been using the A-1 on and off for about 35 years, and I have never once been able to get it to display this EEEEE you're talking about. And I just gave mine a workout right now to see if I could. Shoot. No luck!

Click to expand...

1. Set the camera to manual mode
2. Set LENS aperture to a value (i.e. f5.6)
3. Stop down the lens by using the stop down button on the A-1
4. Now set LENS aperture to A
5. Set camera to Program or Tv mode

If you try to shoot, or meter, the LED display should display EEEEE.

Why? Because the "aperture signal coupling lever" is not on its required position for AE, which is fully up. And thus you need to perform a procedure to reset it manually: Press the double-exposure lever, wind the camera again. This procedure is in the manual!!

cooltouch said:

Well, I'll take your word for it with respect to the New F-1, but it's a completely different animal from the A-series Canons. Oh and by the way! I need to mention this, since you've given your reasons why the A-series Canons don't have the aperture connected to a meter readout

Click to expand...

I just gave you the reason. above. But i will ellaborate:

If you wanted the aperture connected to a meter readout on the A-1 (or AE-1), this means that on manual mode the "aperture signal coupling lever" should be left loose to follow the position of the "aperture signal lever" [like on the FTb, AT-1 and F-1s]. This means that, if you change to Tv mode afterwards (step #5 on my above list), the "aperture signal coupling lever" will not be on its required position for AE, and thus you will always get an EEEEE display/error whenever you want to switch to AE. And Canon didn't want to have this awkward user experience. Period. QED.

Also, this explains the reason the New F-1 requires a motor drive for Tv operation -- to govern the "aperture signal coupling lever" at will.

It is complex to explain, but I think I have done everything to explain it. BTW I also have extensive experience with the A-series cameras as well.

cooltouch said:

the Canon AT-1, which debuted in 1978, if I'm not mistaken (same year as the A-1) is a totally completely manual exposure only camera. Canon decided to put together this little gem so that film students would buy it instead of an AE-1 and then get all frustrated because of its "crippled" nature when in manual mode. The AT-1 is, in fact, the ONLY amateur-orientated Canon FD camera since the FTb that has a meter that responds to aperture settings (ignoring stop down metering of course). The AV-1 doesn't count because it has no manual mode and the user has no control over shutter speeds at all. So it was possible for Canon to add this feature into at least one of its A-series cameras.

Click to expand...

Again, if you read my post above, you'll see there is no contradiction: The AT-1 has no Tv mode and thus the "aperture signal coupling lever" can follow the "aperture signal lever" all the time, with no problems.

cooltouch said:

I don't think the manual went far enough. All it does is explain how to use that button on the side of the mount for an instant sort of exposure compensation -- and you better hope it's enough.

Click to expand...

You have a different A-1 manual then. Mine has the bearded man pics, it tells you which exposure compensation dial setting to use depending on the situation. See manual on butkus' website.

cooltouch said:

Well it does have exposure compensation settings on that dial on the left, but honestly, when's the last time you used exposure compensation?

Click to expand...

I used them all the time for AE photography in dimly lit jazz clubs.

cooltouch said:

I still think that Canon's metering method found on the original F-1 and the FTb was just about perfect. You have a central rectangle that occupies about 12% of the image area

Click to expand...

I agree.

cooltouch said:

You know, Nikon came up with just about a perfect averaging method with most all of their cameras' meters that were made from the mid-70s onward. 60-40 metering, with 60% emphasis occurring inside a largish circle visible in the viewfinder and 40% outside of it. Nikon stuck with that for years.They tightened it up on the F3 to 80-20 though. My reasoning as to why they did was they figured pros who were shooting slide film, with its very narrow exposure latitude, would get a greater percentage of correctly exposed shots than if they went with their 60-40 pattern. I don't know if that was their actual motive behind it,

Click to expand...

The motive is really technical. The F3 wanted to dispense with the meter-inside-prism concept. They could go the F-1 route with split prism but I guess they didn't because of patents or perhaps some other technical issue.
So they chose to put the meter cell at the bottom of the mirror box. See this image of F3 system: http://camerajunky.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/metering.jpg

The way the cell is positioned, it would have been damn difficult to achieve any other pattern than spot metering, due to optical reasons.

This is also why the F3 requires a translucent mirror, and this is why the F3 finder brightness isn't any better than the F2 cameras.

cooltouch said:

but based on personal experience with the F3 and shooting slides with the camera set to "A" I had very few shots where perfect exposure was missed.

Click to expand...

Yet me, with the F-1N and a screen for the 'bottom centerweighted averaging' pattern that you hate so much, also got perfect Provia 100F exposed slides on my last trip, all exposures, all situations. It depends on just knowing the meter.

Just as people using the most primitive TTL meter, the averaging meter on the Spotmatic, can also get perfectly exposed slides. I still agree Partial method is the best, only because it requires less effort, less thinking needed. Same for the F3 meter.

E. von Hoegh said:

Interesting. I like the fact that the F/F2 have no electronics in the body. Meter craps out? Just put another finder on, send the broken one to the repairman without tying up the entire camera.

Click to expand...

The meter in most of the currently available Nikon F2's on the used market have "crapped out"., indeed many of them that are still in use, I understand it's due to excessive wear on the carbon strip in the Photomic head.I. have two Canon F1n's that must be more than thirty years old and the meters are working perfectly and giving accurate exposures.

One of the things I've liked best about the original F1 (whether the original F-1 or the later F-1n update) is the meter. It is unfailingly accurate and must be very ruggedly built. Of the many F-1s I've owned, I've only run across one -- a very heavily used example -- that had a non-working meter. On the other hand, I've encountered quite a few F2s with dead meters. That resistor ring is definitely an Achilles heel on an otherwise amazingly robust camera system.

cooltouch said:

Canon decided to put together this little gem so that film students would buy it instead of an AE-1 and then get all frustrated because of its "crippled" nature when in manual mode

Click to expand...

The AT-1 was created for emerging markets who considered the AE-1 too expensive. That's why the AT-1 wasn't available in Japan and some other "first world" countries. In reality I doubt there was much if any production cost difference between the AE-1 and AT-1 as they are virtually identical apart from the exposure system. However the AE-1 could be sold at a premium as a new generation automated camera in the way a needle metered camera could not.

For a modern user the AT-1 has a lot going for it. It's a fully manual camera, with an extensive range of high quality lenses that are less pricey than the competition, and has the benefits of electronic control and readily available batteries. Like all A-series Canons it can suffer from mirror bearing squeak, but the cure is known and the fix available for anyone interested. The AT-1 was basically a hamstrung electronic camera whose benefits outweigh its deficiencies.

I've always thought of the AT-1 as Canon's way of continuing the legacy established by FTb, which in my opinion was still the superior camera. But as a manufacturer it made more sense to knock out AT-1s since they were essentially the same chassis as the AE-1.

cooltouch said:

One of the things I've liked best about the original F1 (whether the original F-1 or the later F-1n update) is the meter. It is unfailingly accurate and must be very ruggedly built. Of the many F-1s I've owned, I've only run across one -- a very heavily used example -- that had a non-working meter. On the other hand, I've encountered quite a few F2s with dead meters. That resistor ring is definitely an Achilles heel on an otherwise amazingly robust camera system.

Click to expand...

Sover Wong sells new resistor rings.

cooltouch said:

I've always thought of the AT-1 as Canon's way of continuing the legacy established by FTb, which in my opinion was still the superior camera. But as a manufacturer it made more sense to knock out AT-1s since they were essentially the same chassis as the AE-1.

Click to expand...

I own both and use the AT-1 slightly more. The FTb is undoubtedly a solid camera in the mould of the Minolta SRT, Pentax Spotmatic, Nikkormat, etc. Of the heavy metal bodies cameras I find myself reaching for the Nikkormat, perhaps based on the pre-AI lenses of which I own more than the breech lock FDs. The new FD lenses, excellent as they are optically, don't chime with the older bodies though I'm happy to use them on A and T-Series cameras.

I've used lots of nFD lenses on my old Canon FTbs and F-1s. I didn't pay much attention to the difference between the FD breechlocks and the nFD lenses back in the day. I shot with what I had. I find that I'm still pretty much the same, though.

Huss said:

Sover Wong sells new resistor rings.

Click to expand...

I know, God bless him!