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

[benjiboy]

These days the better one is there one some poor soul gives you along with the rest of the kit "because no one uses these any more, do they…?"

Phillip

What do you use Phillip ?, the Nikon F, F 2, and F 3, and the Canon F1 and F1N are some of the best manual focus professional S.L.R.'s ever made as I'm sure many members of this forum will agree.

 

[fotch]

Whats with this looks thing? Your not dating a person, your using a tool. It it works like it should, or better than most other similar tools, its good.

 

[Les Sarile]

One of the reasons I dislike the F3 is was styled by Georgetto Giugiaro an Italian industrial designer and it looks to me more like a fashion item with the flattened prism top shape and the red stripe than a classic camera should, the F and the F2 do look like the classics they definitely are.

Of course the Canon New F-1 also had the flattened prism top.

The three pro SLRs that were released in 1980 & 1981.

 

[SchwinnParamount]

Whats with this looks thing? Your not dating a person, your using a tool. It it works like it should, or better than most other similar tools, its good.

Exactly right. However, if you have two equally great tools and one of them is substantially better looking than the other, aren't you tempted to pick up the more attractive one?

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

I have this book on the new F1

Canon sent me this book over 30 years ago. My first F1n I bought was a lemon so they sent me this book as an apology. But the replacement is bullet proof. The preface said the camera was introduced in 1981. Gee I feel old.

http://m.flickr.com/#/photos/mainecoonmaniac/11933369374/

 

[E. von Hoegh]

Exactly right. However, if you have two equally great tools and one of them is substantially better looking than the other, aren't you tempted to pick up the more attractive one?

Yes indeed. Or, the one which just feels better. Unless it's a @##$@&*% Canon, of course.

 

[Andrew K]

This is one argument I've always loved

I was a Canon camera tech back in the days of film, and one thing that often came up was "which is better - Canon or Nikon"? I was a bit of a maverick, as I actually used Minolta cameras (SRT's) at the time, and had previously used Nikon F's and F2's. I then changed over to Canon because a) I could borrow any lens from the loan cabinet, and b) when one of the newspapers sold off all their Canon gear I got an amazing deal on NF1's with motor drives and a range of lenses form 24mm to 300/2.8.

But I digress. At the time we (the 2 techs who actually took photos) had an a similar opinion. Both camera systems were relaible and capable of first class results.

It was the lenses that were different. Nikon were sharper wide angle (between 14mm and 28mm). From 35mm to 135mm both systems produced pretty much identical results. From 200mm and up Canon were ahead in terms of results.

I know this is going to cause an argument, but it was backed up by many of the photographers we spoke to who had shot with both systems (quite a few of whom owned 1 system, but shot with the other system "at work").

As for me? I currently own a Old F1, a New F1, a Nikon F (I sold my F2), a Nikkormat FTn and half a dozen Minolta SRT's. Nearly forgot, I've also got a Pentax MX (which many people consider one of their best ever cameras). And a OM1 Olympus (now that's a under-rated camera system).

I've got various lenses for all the systems.

Bottom line? I can use any of the cameras listed with any of the lenses I own, and you can't tell the difference in the final result in slide.

Prins? Well that depends on what enlarger lens you use......and that, as they say, is another story....

 

[clayne]

I thought everyone already knew the F2 was superior to any F-1? ;-)

 

[fotch]

Exactly right. However, if you have two equally great tools and one of them is substantially better looking than the other, aren't you tempted to pick up the more attractive one?

I look at the personality, intelligence. Beauty is only skin deep.

 

[Mad4MF]

What do you use Phillip ?, the Nikon F, F 2, and F 3, and the Canon F1 and F1N are some of the best manual focus professional S.L.R.'s ever made as I'm sure many members of this forum will agree.

I was gifted with an AE-1 and a couple of lenses and bought an 85 1.8 that became my all the time setup. Then when the chip in the body died what could I do but pick up an old F-1?

 

[Tom1956]

In more than 40 years of hearing all this Canon-Nikon altercation, the truth is that the Mamiya/Sekor 1000 DTL was actually the most useful and user friendly. Today, I use my Nikkormat FTn/FT2 because it's the closest match to the DTL. The DTL's now have a common problem that the spot-meter cells are not holding linearity with the averaging cells. Many spot cells have lost sensitivity hopelessly. On the oither hand, the Nikkormats have held up admirably over the years, so I use that. In all the Nikkormats I've worked on, only 1 turned up with a dead cell. Further, the Nikkormats have a 94% viewfinder-to-gate coverage, and the DTL's have 85%. Both on-center. As an aside, Pentax SP series was off-center, LR and TB. So it's actually a question of Nikkormat vs Mamiya DTL. Nikon F2 is the finest fit-and-finish 35 in history, but is disqualified by reason of the need for light above the user's head to see the meter. If there's no light above your head, you don't have any meter; you can't see the blasted needle.

 

[SchwinnParamount]

In truth, my F2 meter is 2 stops off. On the other hand, my Canon F-1 is still darn accurate. Regarding overhead light, Canon solved the problem by giving you the option to backlight the display and even cooler, saves battery power by leaving the light on for 15 seconds before auto shut off. In practice, I make 95% of my images in situations where there is enough overhead light that I don't need backlight for either camera.

 

[benjiboy]

In truth, my F2 meter is 2 stops off. On the other hand, my Canon F-1 is still darn accurate. Regarding overhead light, Canon solved the problem by giving you the option to backlight the display and even cooler, saves battery power by leaving the light on for 15 seconds before auto shut off. In practice, I make 95% of my images in situations where there is enough overhead light that I don't need backlight for either camera.

Canon put the light meter in the camera body because they did some experiments and found it gave more accurate readings than having it in the prism finder, and it also retained the metering ability in all the various viewfinders available.

 

[dynachrome]

With the F-1 and F-1n the meter can be used with the standard finder, Serve EE finder and Speed Finder. The needle can't be seen with the Waist Level finder and the Booster finder has its own meter. It would be handy to be able to use the Waist Level finder with the built-in meter. The Speed Finder can be used instead but the magnification is lower.

 

[lxdude]

Canon put the light meter in the camera body because they did some experiments and found it gave more accurate readings than having it in the prism finder, and it also retained the metering ability in all the various viewfinders available.

There's something good to say for each approach. Canon's approach meant that the meter was tightly integrated and worked with most finders; Nikon's meant that the meter could be improved, in a time of rapid change in technology.

 

[benjiboy]

There's something good to say for each approach. Canon's approach meant that the meter was tightly integrated and worked with most finders; Nikon's meant that the meter could be improved, in a time of rapid change in technology.

That's true, the philosophy that Canon had for their professional F1 range was that they would update it every ten years to keep up with technical developments.

 

[richard ide]

You could purchase an illuminator for the F2 Photomic. With over 100K shots on my first one, I could have used the illuminator 2 or 3 times.

 

[Les Sarile]

There's something good to say for each approach. Canon's approach meant that the meter was tightly integrated and worked with most finders; Nikon's meant that the meter could be improved, in a time of rapid change in technology.

I am only aware of one product that got an updated meter and that was the Minolta XK. The original AE finder was equipped with CDS cels then a few years later an AES finder was released with a silicon cel. This finder was developed for the XM/XK/X-1 MOTOR version because the CDS cels in the original AE finder were not fast enough.

 

[SchwinnParamount]

I believe the Nikon DP12 was a significant upgrade from the DP11. No only did it go to the more readable LED display, I think they changed from Cds to silicone dioxide.

 

[SchwinnParamount]

I am only aware of one product that got an updated meter and that was the Minolta XK. The original AE finder was equipped with CDS cels then a few years later an AES finder was released with a silicon cel. This finder was developed for the XM/XK/X-1 MOTOR version because the CDS cels in the original AE finder were not fast enough.

Your XK looks like a cross between an F2 and an F-1

 

[lxdude]

I am only aware of one product that got an updated meter and that was the Minolta XK. The original AE finder was equipped with CDS cels then a few years later an AES finder was released with a silicon cel. This finder was developed for the XM/XK/X-1 MOTOR version because the CDS cels in the original AE finder were not fast enough.

The F2 had numerous new Photomic metering heads, including changing from CdS cells to silicon cells, from needle readout to LED's, and from manual indexing (AKA the Nikon twist) to Automatic Indexing (AI).

If memory serves, this is how it went. The full name for each version included "Photomic" after the alphanumeric designation for the camera/finder combination (e.g., F2SB Photomic), but other than the original version with the DP-1, it was seldom used except by Nikon.

DP-1: Original head, CdS cells, needle indication. -- F2 camera + DP-1 finder = F2 Photomic.
DP-2: CdS cells, LED indication. -- F2 + DP-2 = F2S
DP-3: Silicon Blue cells, LED indication. -- F2 + DP-3 = F2SB.
DP-11: CdS cells, needle indication, AI. -- F2 + DP-11 = F2A.
DP-12: Silicon Blue cells, LED indication, AI. -- F2 + DP-12 = F2AS.

 

[lxdude]

Of course the Canon New F-1 also had the flattened prism top.

The three pro SLRs that were released in 1980 & 1981.

The standard finders on the LX were the FA-1 or the less common FA-1W (which has a slightly smaller magnification and a broader diopter adjustment range). Both have a more flattened top with a TTL flash shoe, and a window in front to read the lens f/stop setting. The FA-2 finder pictured has the magnification and diopter adjustment of the FA-1, no flash shoe and no f/stops visible. Because of that, it was cheaper when new, and fewer were sold. Now, because it is somewhat rare, and because it looks good on the camera, there's a demand for it and it's more expensive than the other two.

 

[lxdude]

One of the reasons I dislike the F3 is was styled by Georgetto Giugiaro an Italian industrial designer and it looks to me more like a fashion item with the flattened prism top shape and the red stripe than a classic camera should, the F and the F2 do look like the classics they definitely are.

In defense of the F3, the F2's metering heads had a flattened top (comparing camera w/meter to camera w/meter). And of course, the F had its various Phugly Photomic heads. I never did understand why Nikon thought it necessary to jazz up their F3 with fancy Italian design cues when they had such an elegant, all-business look to the prior F series machines- a look which they continued in their FM and FE models.

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

In defense of the F3, the F2's metering heads had a flattened top (comparing camera w/meter to camera w/meter). And of course, the F had its various Phugly Photomic heads. I never did understand why Nikon thought it necessary to jazz up their F3 with fancy Italian design cues when they had such an elegant, all-business look to the prior F series machines- a look which they continued in their FM and FE models.

I too used to phind the big photonic heads phugly but phrankly now I like them. They are such phantastic cameras. At least those are my pheelings.

 

[E. von Hoegh]

13 pages... on which 40 year old camera is best. I feel like I'm reading ModPhot in 1974!

Just get a Nikon.