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

[flavio81]

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.

This is because the Canon F-1 has no resistor rings or resistor strips. The meter rotates instead, according to the selected shutter speed and selected ASA value. This is a more complex way, because it requires a pulley/string system.

 

[colin wells]

But what workaround are you using for the battery problem

 

[benjiboy]

I use two of these Colin http://www.smallbattery.company.org.uk/sbc_mr9_adapter.htm one for each of my Canon F1n's, they work perfectly and give correct exposures. I highly recommend them.

 

[benjiboy]

Sover Wong sells new resistor rings.

He has them I don't think he "sells" them per se http://soverf2repair.webs.com/DP12_ring_resistor.htm., he can install them as part of a camera service.

 

[flavio81]

But what workaround are you using for the battery problem

I just use #675 hearing aid zinc-air cell batteries. They give exactly the correct voltage, stable over time, they are cheap, and they last long enough. The only thing needed are two little spacers (i made out of cardboard) to keep it centered. Works just fine.

 

[benjiboy]

I just use #675 hearing aid zinc-air cell batteries. They give exactly the correct voltage, stable over time, they are cheap, and they last long enough. The only thing needed are two little spacers (i made out of cardboard) to keep it centered. Works just fine.

I know this works Flavio, but Zinc Air batteries don't last very long because they are constantly leaking air, whereas PX 675 Silver Oxide watch batteries in a MR9 adaptor reduces the voltage by one volt to the correct 1.35 V, has a constant discharge characteristic, and lasts for very much longer. than hearing aid batteries.

 

[cooltouch]

Benjiboy, yes your fancy adapter works well enough with 625 SOs, but if you're cheap like me, the 675s are great workarounds -- especially if you have to feed as many cameras as I do. Look, I can buy a card of 48 675s at Costco for less than $10. So what if I have to replace one every few months? Besides, they work great in the old cameras. THe Zinc-Air battery's discharge profile is virtually identical to the profiles found in those terrible old poisonous Mercury-based PX-625s.

 

[flavio81]

. THe Zinc-Air battery's discharge profile is virtually identical to the profiles found in those terrible old poisonous Mercury-based PX-625s.

Exactly. What Michael said. They are the most dirext replacement in teems of characteistics, cheap, and IMO last long enoguh (some months).

 

[MattKing]

Jon Goodman sells a really neat adapter that uses the 675 hearing aid batteries, and he is great to deal with!

 

[colin wells]

I made my own adapter and stepdown out of an old battery case. The diodes cost pennies all it takes is time. I can now use any battery (I use. silver oxide) and know it's the correct voltage. I've found 1.55v makes a hell of a difference to the meter.

 

[benjiboy]

Benjiboy, yes your fancy adapter works well enough with 625 SOs, but if you're cheap like me, the 675s are great workarounds -- especially if you have to feed as many cameras as I do. Look, I can buy a card of 48 675s at Costco for less than $10. So what if I have to replace one every few months? Besides, they work great in the old cameras. THe Zinc-Air battery's discharge profile is virtually identical to the profiles found in those terrible old poisonous Mercury-based PX-625s.

I have 2 Canon F1n cameras I need the MR9 adaptor for, fortunately, one of the bodies already had one in it when I bought it, although I did buy a second one to avoid having to change them, or if I wanted to use both cameras at the same time

 

[flavio81]

This is because the Canon F-1 has no resistor rings or resistor strips. The meter rotates instead, according to the selected shutter speed and selected ASA value. This is a more complex way, because it requires a pulley/string system.

Just as an update, i bought yet another F-1 (original model) and had to dissasemble the top covers.

The metering system uses no potentiomenters and no pulleys. It uses a precision cam and a straight wire. The speed dial rotates the cam and a cam follower moves the galvanometer accordingly. So nothing to go wrong save for the meter and the cds cell itself, which is a special Canon custom type.

Electrically this also isn't a 'bridge' meter so it's highly sensitive to voltage variations. Thus, use mercury or zinc-air cells instead. I use zinc-air cells and was amazed and how exact were the metering between the F-1 I just bought and the F-1 i already had.

 

[flavio81]

for example. I definitely like the FL 35mm f/2.5 better than my Nikon 35mm f/2, although the Nikon is very useful with the extra stop of speed.

HI Cooltouch, I know this is a very old post, but I'm curious to know exactly which version of the Nikon 35/2 you have.

I have the Nikkor-O 35/2 and definitely would consider superior in every way to the FL 35/2.5 I owned. Lovely rendering.

 

[Karl K]

The late Marty Forscher, owner of Professional Camera Repair in NYC, serviced most cameras of the pros for decades in the '60's, '70's, and '80's.
He stated that the Nikon F2 was the best 35mm camera ever made.
The F2 bodies were the strongest and had the lowest failure rate under heavy usage.
F2 bodies required less maintenance than either Leicas or Canons.
In Japan, the design team for the F2 were held in the highest esteem.
Canon was playing catch-up at that time.

 

[flavio81]

View attachment 249836



The late Marty Forscher, owner of Professional Camera Repair in NYC, serviced most cameras of the pros for decades in the '60's, '70's, and '80's.
He stated that the Nikon F2 was the best 35mm camera ever made.
The F2 bodies were the strongest and had the lowest failure rate under heavy usage.
F2 bodies required less maintenance than either Leicas or Canons.
In Japan, the design team for the F2 were held in the highest esteem.
Canon was playing catch-up at that time.

Well i own Nikon F2A, F2SB, two Canon F-1 and two New F-1.

I can believe the F2 requiring less maintenance, but externally I would say the F-1 is better finished/fitted and even feels more solid. Ergonomically i prefer the Canon, although the F2 is better featured. Mechanically the F-1 feels smoother on film advance and release.

On the other hand, mechanically, the Nikon F3 shutter feels better than my canons.

I think a Pentax MX is maybe a better camera than both, for actual usage. Unless you would need to go to war and document it.

 

[darkosaric]

I like my F and F3 more than my F2 in everyday use, but nothing is strong and tough as F2. Nothing. My M3 feels best from all cameras that I have, but when going in some extreme situation: F2 is the best.

 

[flavio81]

I like my F and F3 more than my F2 in everyday use, but nothing is strong and tough as F2. Nothing. My M3 feels best from all cameras that I have, but when going in some extreme situation: F2 is the best.

Don't you prefer the F2 viewfinder over the F3?

And I always felt the F being the toughest of all them ...

 

[Deleted member 88956]

I've used both extensively and in my opinion the Canon bodies are just awful to use. They tried to automate things away when really all I want is a reliable body with a meter that tells me what it sees and lets me choose what to do with that information. Ditch the Canon, buy a nikon.

Clearly you have never used the F-1 or its next companion F-1n. Between these two and Nikon F2 there is a difference in everything, but both are top premium manual cameras. It is a draw o me except one will likely feel better in specific hands than the other. When it came to buying one I went the Canon way and dropped a great Nikon F2 deal in the process. Now I have the F-1 and the F-1n and with such minuscule differences love them both the same, but they are different.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

For those in the market there is an MR9 battery adapter out of Thailand at roughly half price of what small battery company sells them for. Beautifully made and works as advertised.

Those discussing finders in F1 vs. any Nikon, got to see Leicaflex SL2. It's like UK8 TV in front of you in comparison.

 

[darkosaric]

Don't you prefer the F2 viewfinder over the F3?

And I always felt the F being the toughest of all them ...

Viewfinder quality on F3 and F2/F are more less the same to my eye. I like F/F2 plain prism most of all, because there is absolutely no info inside, only your frame. But that is very personal, I don't like any info in the finders (like also for example in my M3, M4, or Minilux).

 

[flavio81]

Those discussing finders in F1 vs. any Nikon, got to see Leicaflex SL2. It's like UK8 TV in front of you in comparison.

I tried the SL of a friend (not SL2) and was similar to the viewfinder on my Canon New F-1, or the viewfinder on my F2SB + screen from the F3, which is an awesome combination by the way.

You can always make a brighter screen with the risk of losing focus precision, so I would take a bit of care when thinking about brightness. I had a Pentax 67 with an aftermarket bright screen... yes the screen was bright, and it was very hard to have consistent focusing since the depth of field was too wide (compared to the actual narrow DOF).

Nowadays i prefer screens that give me accurate focus no matter what the brightness is. The Pentax Spotmatic screen is one such example.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

I tried the SL of a friend (not SL2) and was similar to the viewfinder on my Canon New F-1, or the viewfinder on my F2SB + screen from the F3, which is an awesome combination by the way.

You can always make a brighter screen with the risk of losing focus precision, so I would take a bit of care when thinking about brightness. I had a Pentax 67 with an aftermarket bright screen... yes the screen was bright, and it was very hard to have consistent focusing since the depth of field was too wide (compared to the actual narrow DOF).

Nowadays i prefer screens that give me accurate focus no matter what the brightness is. The Pentax Spotmatic screen is one such example.

SL2 is not SL, humongous difference, I have both. I don't know of a competition to SL2 screen in brightness and especially vastness of its panoramic view. This is a screen Leica designed to be that way, no aftermarket BS here. It works and it is beyond belief how well.

 

[flavio81]

SL2 is not SL, humongous difference, I have both. I don't know of a competition to SL2 screen in brightness and especially vastness of its panoramic view. This is a screen Leica designed to be that way, no aftermarket BS here. It works and it is beyond belief how well.

Have you compared it to the Canon New F-1's viewfinder? That is my benchmark, although as I said, my F2SB /F2A with the screens from the F3 are as bright and precise.

Also, BTW, eyepoint should be taken into account. it's easy for a camera designer to enlarge the image (and get the "panoramic view") but making the eyepoint too near.

Now, the SL/SL2 have an enormous prism bulge so maybe it is the king of viewfinders... no optical restrictions due to size.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

Have you compared it to the Canon New F-1's viewfinder? That is my benchmark, although as I said, my F2SB /F2A with the screens from the F3 are as bright and precise.

Also, BTW, eyepoint should be taken into account. it's easy for a camera designer to enlarge the image (and get the "panoramic view") but making the eyepoint too near.

Now, the SL/SL2 have an enormous prism bulge so maybe it is the king of viewfinders... no optical restrictions due to size.

I do not have New F-1, have previous 2 versions and F-1n with L screen is great in every way. What makes SL2 different is not just the brightness but the real estate and I don't need to have my eye stuck to the finder either (not sure what the official eye point is). It's strange how I wound up getting the SL and soon after the SL2, neither ever considered until just days before purchase. But no regrets (and SL2 was not cheap). While I also have an R5 (and probably R6 eventually) and R5 is a fine camera, the SL2 is indeed what people say, with SL close behind.

 

[Kodachromeguy]

View attachment 249836



The late Marty Forscher, owner of Professional Camera Repair in NYC, serviced most cameras of the pros for decades in the '60's, '70's, and '80's.
He stated that the Nikon F2 was the best 35mm camera ever made.
The F2 bodies were the strongest and had the lowest failure rate under heavy usage.
F2 bodies required less maintenance than either Leicas or Canons.
In Japan, the design team for the F2 were held in the highest esteem.
Canon was playing catch-up at that time.

Mr. Forscher was an amazing gent. He must have remained at Professional Camera Repair well after the 1989 article. In 1995, I was hiking in Mount Athos in Greece when I dropped my Leica M3. Immediately, the viewfinder (or was it the rangefinder spot?) became black. It proved to be the well-known delamination of the prism caused by failing balsam. I called around, and all repair shops said they could only fix it with another entire rangefinder from another M3. Fortunately, I called PCR and Mr. Forscher himself answered the phone and told me to send the camera to him. A few weeks later, it was back and in perfect condition. I will always remember his great service.

Mr. Forscher's obituary from the NY Times: https://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/11/nyregion/11forscher.html