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

[LJSLATER]

There was no Nikon F1. It was simply the Nikon F.

We know. I call it the Nikon F1 also. When spoken aloud, just saying "F" sounds odd to me (reminds me of one of my favorite bands, the Eels. Except there's no "the", their official name is just Eels. Diehard fans insist that they should never be called "the Eels", just "Eels", even though it ruins everyone's grammar and sounds idiotic).

Canon really should have named the F-1 something else. I blame them for any potential confusion.

 

[lxdude]

Ok, Mr. Pedantic.

Not pedantic to correct a substantial inaccuracy. Write to clarify, not confuse. What if someone reading this is just getting into film photography and is trying to learn about different makes and models of cameras? I figured you didn't know any better. If you did know better, why do it? What's so difficult about using the correct designation, especially when your incorrect usage can lead to confusion with a very similar, vocally identical, correct designation in the same sentence? As it was, you made your meaning depend unnecessarily on hyphens being in the right places, when text is increasingly being read on small screens.

If there were no F-1, I wouldn't care so much if you called the Nikon F an F1. Either would still be unique to that model.

Earlier today, I did not have time to correct your original post, in which you wrote "F-1n" instead of "F-1N" or "New F-1", but I figured someone would, which they did. It was confusing to anyone who knows the different models, thinking at first you meant one, then figuring out from specifics in the description that you meant another. After you called the Nikon an F1, I figured you didn't know your designations very well. If you know them, use them. Why must a reader need to have specific knowledge in order to figure out which F-1 you're talking about?
Everyone makes typos or poorly constructs sentences at times, and context must be used to understand the meaning. But if you just don't want to bother to be clear, don't criticize people who attempt to clarify it.

If you had just responded to my post with something like,"Yes I know, it's just what I call it", I would have let it go. But you go accusing me of being pedantic, you get full chapter and verse.
Look at my posting history and see if I'm pedantic.
Remember Q.G.? Now HE was pedantic.

 

[lxdude]

We know. I call it the Nikon F1 also. When spoken aloud, just saying "F" sounds odd to me (reminds me of one of my favorite bands, the Eels. Except there's no "the", their official name is just Eels. Diehard fans insist that they should never be called "the Eels", just "Eels", even though it ruins everyone's grammar and sounds idiotic).

Same thing with the band Eagles, usually called The Eagles. But it doesn't really carry over. Adding the definite article "The" doesn't substantially change their name or lead to any confusion, and it sounds right because the name is a plural. On the other hand, Mr. SchwinnParamount stated the name of a camera model that never existed, in paragraphs in which he directly compared it to an actual camera with a name which is almost identical. If it were a spoken conversation, it would have gotten very confusing very quickly.

Canon really should have named the F-1 something else.

I agree. After F-1, where could they go? Then the revised version got called the F-1n and the next version F-1N. Sheesh.

 

[benjiboy]

I believe that Canon didn't provide an A.E lock on the New F1 because it's a professional camera and they expect the users to know enough about exposure to use the exposure override, whereas the consumer grade A series provide the facility.

In addition - instead of an A.E lock Canon provide the user with the option of fitting the F1N with the correct focusing screen either the standard centre weighted "A", the 9 % "P" partial, or the 3% "S" spot screen to give you the right metering pattern sensitivity for the subject in hand.
The F1N's Silicon cell light meter is in the left side of the camera body rather than the prism finders because Canon experimented as part of their ten year development project for the New F1, and found that it supplied more accurate exposures.

 

[dynachrome]

Benjiboy, I disagree with you on two points. Exposure lock is not an amateur feature. It is a useful one. If you are photographing snails then you have plenty of time to make adjustments. With any faster moving subjects exposure lock is still a great convenience. Changing the metering pattern is not a replacement for exposure lock. If I am metering off of a plain white subject and I want the subject to look white in the final image then it doesn't matter what metering pattern I use. If I don't add some exposure the white subject will look gray in the final image. Limited area and spot metering can be very useful but only if you know what to point it at. Not every scene has a convenient mid tone to meter off of so some judgment will always be required. The cameras we are talking about were not nearly sophisticated enough that you could point them at any subject and rely on the meter's results in every case and without adjustment. Today people who use digital cameras have HDR and layers and many other tools to even out or correct exposure. Film cameras from the 1970s and 1980s did not offer these possibilities. When I use a camera like a Minolta X-700 I use exposure lock most often when there is backlighting is present. I will tilt the camera down, lock my reading, tilt back up and shoot. I am not against the F-1N. For me it doesn't have so many advantages over the older F-1 and F-1n models. When it comes to the Nikon F2, in most cases I prefer to use other Nikon models: Nikkormat FTN/FT2/FT3, FE, FE2, N2000, N2020 (very good as a maual focus camera), N90S/F90X (I have one of each). What I like most about the F2 is that the fnder has no distortion at the edges.

 

[benjiboy]

Benjiboy, I disagree with you on two points. Exposure lock is not an amateur feature. It is a useful one. If you are photographing snails then you have plenty of time to make adjustments. With any faster moving subjects exposure lock is still a great convenience. Changing the metering pattern is not a replacement for exposure lock. If I am metering off of a plain white subject and I want the subject to look white in the final image then it doesn't matter what metering pattern I use. If I don't add some exposure the white subject will look gray in the final image. Limited area and spot metering can be very useful but . Not every scene has a convenient mid tone to meter off of so some judgment will always be required. The cameras we are talking about were not nearly sophisticated enough that you could point them at any subject and rely on the meter's results in every case and without adjustment. Today people who use digital cameras have HDR and layers and many other tools to even out or correct exposure. Film cameras from the 1970s and 1980s did not offer these possibilities. When I use a camera like a Minolta X-700 I use exposure lock most often when there is backlighting is present. I will tilt the camera down, lock my reading, tilt back up and shoot. I am not against the F-1N. For me it doesn't have so many advantages over the older F-1 and F-1n models. When it comes to the Nikon F2, in most cases I prefer to use other Nikon models: Nikkormat FTN/FT2/FT3, FE, FE2, N2000, N2020 (very good as a maual focus camera), N90S/F90X (I have one of each). What I like most about the F2 is that the fnder has no distortion at the edges.

To disagree is your prerogative, all I can say is I've had 2 of the 3 F1N's I own (I bought the last one last year), for more than 25 years and have never missed it having an A.E. lock.

 

[fotch]

That holds true for AI and later lenses only, pre AI lenses will damage the aperture coupling on many later bodies if yout try to mount them.

All my lens work on all bodies, the older ones I had converted. Can you do the same with Canon. No.

 

[clayne]

Pick up a gallon of milk with a 4lr44 battery.

I buy the silver oxide (better for cameras) in bulk from sr44.com. Cheaper than the store by far and you can just stack them to make a 4 unit pack.

 

[SchwinnParamount]

Not pedantic to correct a substantial inaccuracy. .

Sheesh, give me a break will you? I doubt anyone on this thread except yourself was confused when I typed "F1" and meant "F".

 

[Vilk]

Sighhh... Such a pity I have never as much as held the Canon in my hand... I could then honestly say each of my F2s was way better...

 

[Tony-S]

There was no Nikon F1. It was simply the Nikon F.

Damn! I just spent two hours searching "Nikon F1" and not finding anything.

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

Still available?

I buy the silver oxide (better for cameras) in bulk from sr44.com. Cheaper than the store by far and you can just stack them to make a 4 unit pack.

I thought they were outlawed?

 

[Tom1956]

I thought they were outlawed?

No, the mercury 1.35V cells were halted, for reason of mercury. PX625 was the biggie of its day.
On another matter, I think the Nikon F2 had a fit-and-feel of being the highest quality 35 ever made. Certainly the finest Japan ever put out. Only the Germans could do better work, but I'm not sure they could have topped the F2.
That said, I've reached an age in life where the Nikkormat is the most sensible, capable 35, for a few reasons the F2 could not beat or even feature.

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

Wow. Thanks for enlightening me. I got mercury batteries confused with silver oxide batteries. I have an old Minolta SRT that needs one of those px625 batteries.

 

[Tom1956]

Put in 357's, and make a little doughnut spacer out of a strip of paper and some white glue. Set your meter to 1/3 stop higher ASA for starters. The 357 was the only battery to give 50% or greater flat output curve comparison to the 625. Do not use modern 625 alkalines. Their discharge curve is horrendous. You never pin down an ASA on them.

 

[Tom1956]

Put in 357's, and make a little doughnut spacer out of a strip of paper and some white glue. Set your meter to 1/3 stop higher ASA for starters. The 357 was the only battery to give 50% or greater flat output curve comparison to the 625. Do not use modern 625 alkalines. Their discharge curve is horrendous. You never pin down an ASA on them.

Correction: set to 1/3 stop lower ASA when 357 is new. Set to box speed after 2 months average use. From then on the battery holds flat until falling off a cliff after 1/2 the expected original lifetime of the mercury PX625. Keep this in mind and you wont be fishing in the dark for a film speed. Batteries tend toward the underexposure side when new, and over exposure as they age. The PX625 mercury could hold flat all its life. Silver is a fair to middling runner-up to mercury. The other technologies are no better than alkaline on that count, which is unfit for meter use.

 

[lxdude]

The other technologies are no better than alkaline on that count, which is unfit for meter use.

Unless the meter is not dependent on specific voltage for accuracy, like the Pentaxes with the bridge circuit.

 

[gone]

The Nikon is better because you can put a Leica R lens on it w/ a lens mount adapter. With the Canon, you have to put the Nikon mount on the Leica lens, then use the Canon FD to Nikon adapter in back of that. A little too fiddeley for my tastes. On the other hand, you can spend $40 for two adapters and use Nikon AND M42 lenses on your Canon, so there's that. Gives you an amazing selection of great glass to shoot.

I prefer shooting the Nikons for a lot of reasons, but both are fine, classic SLRs.

 

[zanxion72]

Canon F1 is by far better than the Nikon F2. It is more reliable. I have two Nikon F2 Photomic with the hell expensive DP2 finders with one of them needing calibration and the other not working at all. On the Canon you just put the lens on it and you are ready to go, while on the Photomic you need to set the finder and the lens on 5.6 then set the lens at maximum aperture and provide that feedback to the finder.
Also, most of the Nikon F2 develop problems with the slow speeds.
The only plus that I could count on the Nikon F2 is that for the meter it does fine with 1.5V button cells. Nothing more.

 

[benjiboy]

Suffice it to say I had 2 Nikon F 2 Photomic's and now have 3 Canon F1N A.E's and after using the F1's for more than 25 years wouldn't go back to the F2' s at any price, because I.M.O the F1N is much more sophisticated than the F2, and technically about two generations ahead of the Nikons.

 

[clayne]

The F-1n came out in 76 and the New F-1 in 81, the Nikon F2 came out in 71, so the F-1n/New had quite a bit of time to get "sophisticated."

I think the F-1 is a fine camera, but I don't own Canon FD gear, hence my use of Nikon and other systems. I think the F2 is probably close to the perfect camera, awesome build, etc. for that time and I'll use one any day of the week without a thought. It's probably more accurate to compare the F-1n and New F-1 to the Nikon F3, rather than the F2. Honestly though, why even put them into a comparison test?

 

[Tony-S]

All this discussion about which camera is better is kind of like orgasms. Even your worst is awesome.

 

[ToddB]

This is Funny.. I was just thinking of the F2 in last couple of days and saw this thread. What a gorgous camera. I love the robust chunky look to it. They are still fitching a pretty penny too on auction sites. Looks like they were built like tanks too. awesome!

Todd

 

[benjiboy]

The F-1n came out in 76 and the New F-1 in 81, the Nikon F2 came out in 71, so the F-1n/New had quite a bit of time to get "sophisticated."

I think the F-1 is a fine camera, but I don't own Canon FD gear, hence my use of Nikon and other systems. I think the F2 is probably close to the perfect camera, awesome build, etc. for that time and I'll use one any day of the week without a thought. It's probably more accurate to compare the F-1n and New F-1 to the Nikon F3, rather than the F2. Honestly though, why even put them into a comparison test?

I agree the New Canon F1 is closer in specification to the Nikon F3 than the Nikon F2, which is closer to the original Canon F1.
At the time these cameras were currently manufactured I worked at a leading professional camera dealer where about 90% of the customers were working pro's, and since I handled all the company's warranty and chargeable repairs I can tell you we got a hell of a lot more Nikon F3's to repair than New canon F1's especially under warranty.

 

[E. von Hoegh]

This is Funny.. I was just thinking of the F2 in last couple of days and saw this thread. What a gorgous camera. I love the robust chunky look to it. They are still fitching a pretty penny too on auction sites. Looks like they were built like tanks too. awesome!

Todd

There are some very attractive deals on F2s at KEH. And here from time to time. You want an eye opener, look up what an F or F2 cost new and compare that to the cost of a new car at the same time. I love my F, I've had several. I'll have an F2 when the right one appears at the right time, not because I need one - I have two Nikkormats, an FT and an FTN, plus the F/FTN finder, plain prism as well - I just want one. And having an odd number of Nikons is bad juju.