Like I said in previous post comparing the F2 and the New F1 isn't fair as they were introduced in different times. But you make me pick I pick the F2. The new F1 is way too complicated.
I even pick the F3 is you were to make that comparison. In fact I pick the Nikon any time before the introduction of the EOS.
Just as a matter of interest I have 3 Canon New F1 bodys all manufactured in different years all bought second hand between 20 and 30 years ago, and when I check the cameras light meters against each other with a Kodak Grey Card and a handheld meter of known accuracy they all agree exactly, which quite frankly amazes me, and one of the reasons I'm such a big fan of the New F1.This debate was a perennial favorite in photo magazines of the '70s. It makes even less sense now than it did then.
The answer now is "the one you like best", since not a single one of us will ever use these cameras and lenses as heavily as they were designed to be used. D@mn few did when they were current, nobody will now. Lens quality? yeah right. That one's been dead for decades too.
With the preference many (most?) have for getting another body rather than having one serviced, I wonder how many of either of these cameras are functioning anywhere near factory spec. Probably not many.
Just as a matter of interest I have 3 Canon New F1 bodys all manufactured in different years all bought second hand between 20 and 30 years ago, and when I check the cameras light meters against each other with a Kodak Grey Card and a handheld meter of known accuracy they all agree exactly, which quite frankly amazes me, and one of the reasons I'm such a big fan of the New F1.
P.S.
F1's are such quality cameras I would rather get my F1's serviced than replace them with ones of unknown history from auction sites where the previous owners may have had them apart on their kitchen table, that may prove eventually to have even worse faults than mine, and I know where the ones I own have been for the last 23-30 years.
As I've already written on this thread I have 3 New F1's for more than 25 years and I have never had any problems with the battery contacts on any of them, the only money I have had to spend on them in all that time is one of them recently developed a slow mirror fault, I had it C.L.A'd at my local professional dealers, their camera technician did a great job on it, and I'm as happy as Larry.Yep, You're right.
That being said, I am SO torn between my Nikons and the single Canon I own now (owned a few before, but never an F-1). Nikon, has everything the F-1 has, minus the reliable meter (oops!). Canon... wait for it.
Ok there is one knock against the F-1. That freaking battery chamber spring. The one that holds the negative battery terminal post up against the battery. Every Canon I've ever owned, the spring gives up the ghost and I end up having to put in a stop-gap copper thingie to make the negative terminal contact. That is just so amateur. WTF Canon? You have a great camera in virtually all respects except you drop the ball BADLY in the one bit that really kills the camera. The electronics.
Ben,You can't compare the Canon A series cameras with the F series any more than you can compare the Nikon EM with the F2 or F3
As I've already written on this thread I have 3 New F1's for more than 25 years and I have never had any problems with the battery contacts on any of them, the only money I have had to spend on them in all that time is one of them recently developed a slow mirror fault, I had it C.L.A'd at my local professional dealers, their camera technician did a great job on it, and I'm as happy as Larry.
P.S. You can't compare the Canon A series cameras with the F series any more than you can compare the Nikon EM with the F2 or F3 because the consumer grade A series were made for a mass market to a price, The F series were made as a professional tool and to a quality. I have owned A series cameras in the past, the last one was an A1 that I had for about 25 years but never liked it,I eventually gave it to my niece last year.
I have them both and love them both. Silly question, but should I love one more than the other?
Going back to your original question, is there a feature or function that one can't do given a particular shooting requirement?
For instance do you need the F2's MLU to minimize camera movement or the New F-1's autoexposure mode in fast shooting conditions? Given the specific conditions, maybe it's a case of horses for courses and you need both.
Yep, that's right. Of course, when I want a perfectly still camera for a tack sharp image, I usually go to the RB-67 and a tripod. Now that I think about it, I don't think I've ever used the MLU on any of my Nikons.
But how many 35 seconds exposure do you get before the battery is exhausted ?
But you didn't answer the question of what feature one has over the other besides "looks" and "nameplate". For instance I prefer the LX's ability to aperture priority autoexpose a scene for as long as it takes - a feature that no other camera brand or model, past or present, can do. This gives me a photographic opportunity such as the 35 minute autoexposure example below on Kodak Ektar 100.
Hoover Dam at night
Actually, I've gotten auto-exposure times over an hour with the Nikon FE. Never tried it with the FE2, but I suspect there may be a few other brands/models out there that have this capability. Although I usually time long exposures manually to compensate for reciprocity - something the camera's meter can't do for you.
For instance I prefer the LX's ability to aperture priority autoexpose a scene for as long as it takes - a feature that no other camera brand or model, past or present, can do.
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?