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

[Tony-S]

To me the new FD lenses must have already past the test of time after more than 25 years since they were made, and disproved all those who sneered at them, and since I often carry 4 or 5 of them the fact that they are around half the weight of the metal barrelled one is very significant.

I agree. In my mind it's no contest. The New FD are superior to the older FD. I only have one of the older FDs left - the 135mm f/2.5. It's a great lens, but I prefer the New FD f/2.

 

[tokam]

... all the rest of my FD lenses are the polymer type in which the bearing surfaces on the focusing helicoids are Teflon coated that can't dry out and is still as smooth as ever in all ten of my other lenses.

I'd agree that the FDn lenses focus smoothly. The focus action would appear to use fine threaded helicoid with quite a long throw, around 180 degrees plus on most of my FDn primes.

There is a separate issue I have with a couple of FDn zooms which have separate focus and zoom rings. The zoom ring on my FDn 35-70 2.8/3.5 SSC lens has a very short throw, less than 90 degrees to move the lens groups quite a long distance within the lens barrel. I.e. The zoom helicoid is very coarse by comparison to the one used for focusing. The end result in my case is that the zoom ring now feels quite 'dry' and I suspect this is due to wear in the mechanism that engages the helicoid. The lens dates from 1981 and was last serviced in 1993.

I don't believe it's a lubrication issue as I have read elsewhere that Canon used nylon or similar components in these helicoids and improved them in the later EF lenses with more wear resistant materials. I have also read that the FDn zooms, in some cases, can have the worn component replaced with parts for EF lenses. Apparently it's just the teeth that engage the helicoid that need replacing. I'd only consider it if the lens had other major issues.

Yes, the FDn lenses are lighter than their predecessors and have better coatings. The bodies, however, do show signs of wear much more quickly. Overall I prefer the FDn's for their light weight and easier to mount bayonet.

 

[benjiboy]

I'd agree that the FDn lenses focus smoothly. The focus action would appear to use fine threaded helicoid with quite a long throw, around 180 degrees plus on most of my FDn primes.

There is a separate issue I have with a couple of FDn zooms which have separate focus and zoom rings. The zoom ring on my FDn 35-70 2.8/3.5 SSC lens has a very short throw, less than 90 degrees to move the lens groups quite a long distance within the lens barrel. I.e. The zoom helicoid is very coarse by comparison to the one used for focusing. The end result in my case is that the zoom ring now feels quite 'dry' and I suspect this is due to wear in the mechanism that engages the helicoid. The lens dates from 1981 and was last serviced in 1993.

I don't believe it's a lubrication issue as I have read elsewhere that Canon used nylon or similar components in these helicoids and improved them in the later EF lenses with more wear resistant materials. I have also read that the FDn zooms, in some cases, can have the worn component replaced with parts for EF lenses. Apparently it's just the teeth that engage the helicoid that need replacing. I'd only consider it if the lens had other major issues.

Yes, the FDn lenses are lighter than their predecessors and have better coatings. The bodies, however, do show signs of wear much more quickly. Overall I prefer the FDn's for their light weight and easier to mount bayonet.

The bearing surfaces on the the focusing helicoids on New FD lenses are coated with Teflon http://www.precisioncoating.com/industrial-coatings/teflon-coating-benefits.htm not "Nylon", they have very different abrasion propertys

 

[MartinCrabtree]

As well as wear properties.

 

[blockend]

I have a number of A and T series Canon bodies and quite a few FD and FDn lenses. Although the lenses are all in good shape, I have observed A-series bodies which have carried larger lenses for extended periods are prone to loose bayonet mounts. It isn't a big deal to fix them (just a few screws) but I suspect relative weight is a factor.

 

[benjiboy]

As well as wear properties.

Thanks Martin.

 

[lxdude]

As well as wear properties.

It's important to wear proper ties. If your work requires it.

 

[MartinCrabtree]

Thanks Martin.

Por Nada.

 

[flavio81]

Update:

Last week i had the chance to alternatively use the Nikon F2AS (1977), Canon old F-1 (1971) and Canon New F-1 (1981).
Comparing the New F-1 versus the Nikon F2, and also against the Nikon F3 (which i've used extensively -- by the way, it was introduced 1980 approx.):

The Nikon F2AS i like much more than the F3. I will sell the F3. The viewfinder is as bright and good as the one in my F3. The "match" metering with the LED lights on the F2AS viewfinder is way, way better than the implementation on the F3. And i almost never used the auto mode on the F3. Also, i don't care for TTL OTF flash.

Now, the Canon F-1N ("New") i prefer more than the Nikon F2. The viewfinder is the brightest i've ever seen, with excellent image quality, and even better than the (already good) finder on the F2. The ergonomics i find slightly better on the Canon. Also, the Canon feels sturdier in my hands than the Nikon F2; which gives me a pleasant psychological state-of-mind which I feel contributes to the usage. Both meters are equally reliable and good. But the display of the F/stop and shutter speed is clearer to see on the Canon.

I'd say that the Canon F-1N is a slightly better machine than the Nikon F2. The Canon F-1 (old, 1971 version) has a noticeably dimmer viewfinder than the Nikon F2 (F2AS, 1977 version). However i love that Canon as well.

All in all, any of those three cameras are IMO the best purchases for a lover of Nikon or Canon "classic" cameras. Any of them is a great machine, supported by an excellent and extensive array of lenses.

In this experience, my only surprise was that in general Nikon lenses are slightly better built than the corresponding contemporary Canons, while the Canon F-1 camera is noticeably better built than the Nikon F, F2 and F3!!

 

[benjiboy]

Update:

Last week i had the chance to alternatively use the Nikon F2AS (1977), Canon old F-1 (1971) and Canon New F-1 (1981).
Comparing the New F-1 versus the Nikon F2, and also against the Nikon F3 (which i've used extensively -- by the way, it was introduced 1980 approx.):

The Nikon F2AS i like much more than the F3. I will sell the F3. The viewfinder is as bright and good as the one in my F3. The "match" metering with the LED lights on the F2AS viewfinder is way, way better than the implementation on the F3. And i almost never used the auto mode on the F3. Also, i don't care for TTL OTF flash.

Now, the Canon F-1N ("New") i prefer more than the Nikon F2. The viewfinder is the brightest i've ever seen, with excellent image quality, and even better than the (already good) finder on the F2. The ergonomics i find slightly better on the Canon. Also, the Canon feels sturdier in my hands than the Nikon F2; which gives me a pleasant psychological state-of-mind which I feel contributes to the usage. Both meters are equally reliable and good. But the display of the F/stop and shutter speed is clearer to see on the Canon.

I'd say that the Canon F-1N is a slightly better machine than the Nikon F2. The Canon F-1 (old, 1971 version) has a noticeably dimmer viewfinder than the Nikon F2 (F2AS, 1977 version). However i love that Canon as well.

All in all, any of those three cameras are IMO the best purchases for a lover of Nikon or Canon "classic" cameras. Any of them is a great machine, supported by an excellent and extensive array of lenses.

In this experience, my only surprise was that in general Nikon lenses are slightly better built than the corresponding contemporary Canons, while the Canon F-1 camera is noticeably better built than the Nikon F, F2 and F3!!

I've owned all these cameras in the past Flavio and as I've already written on this thread they are all top quality professional cameras and it's a matter of personal preference of the user, but I feel personally after using three them for more than 25 years that if anyone ever made a better manual focus professional camera system than the New F1 I'd like to hear about it.

 

[flavio81]

I've owned all these cameras in the past Flavio and as I've already written on this thread they are all top quality professional cameras and it's a matter of personal preference of the user, but I feel personally after using three them for more than 25 years that if anyone ever made a better manual focus professional camera system than the New F1 I'd like to hear about it.

Yes, two manufacturers did make a better one:
- The Mamiya RB67 system
- The Rolleiflex SL66 system

(You did not specify "35mm manual focus professional camera system"...)

 

[benjiboy]

Yes, two manufacturers did make a better one:
- The Mamiya RB67 system
- The Rolleiflex SL66 system

(You did not specify "35mm manual focus professional camera system"...)

Now you're just being silly that was taken as read, if you don't behave I'll send you to bed without your supper.

Sent from my KFOT using Tapatalk

 

[John_Nikon_F]

;-)

Camera in the foreground...



Even with the possibility of the body getting out of sync with the lens, it's still what I'd say is the best. Unlike the RB, it fits nicely in the palm of your hand. Wish I still had that beast...

-J

 

[fstop]

haha I agree, I love mine.

 

[Roger Cole]

Also, i don't care for TTL OTF flash.

Just curious about this and why not? Of course it only works with compatible flash units and has some limitations but in my experience those cameras don't preclude you from using other flashes and methods, they just make this available with the right methods. I rarely use flash but when I do I really appreciate the TTL OTF flash metering in my Pentax LX.

 

[RattyMouse]

haha I agree, I love mine.

Do you have all the cameras that are listed in your sig file? That's an enormous list!

 

[flavio81]

Just curious about this and why not? Of course it only works with compatible flash units and has some limitations but in my experience those cameras don't preclude you from using other flashes and methods, they just make this available with the right methods. I rarely use flash but when I do I really appreciate the TTL OTF flash metering in my Pentax LX.

Because i almost never use on-camera flash, and when i do, i use a Vivitar 285 with the auto-sensor which works just fine in bounce mode, with any camera.

 

[flavio81]

Do you have all the cameras that are listed in your sig file? That's an enormous list!

Impressive. From his list i would keep:

F, F2AS,FE2,XK,XM,XE-7,F-1,F-1N, and maybe one of the Olympus.

I've sold many cameras to reduce gear down to the cameras that i really, really like. Right now my list is:

SLR:
Nikon F2AS, F3*, FE, FG*; Canon F-1, F-1New; Canon EOS 5;
Mamiya RB67 (two of them)

TLR:
Mamiya C330 (two); Rolleicord 3.5 Xenar*

Rangefinders:
Kodak Retina IIIc

Others:
Zenobia 6x4.5 folder camera
Ensign Selfix 820 6x9 folder camera*
Rollei 35 (made in germany)*

Cameras marked with "*" will be sold, since i have other cameras that i like more in place of them.

 

[fstop]

Do you have all the cameras that are listed in your sig file? That's an enormous list!

It gets even more crazy, where there are chrome and black versions, I have one of each.
But it represents over 35 years of actively collecting.
I started selling some off last year and I'm pruning it down to just the top end.

 

[fstop]

Impressive. From his list i would keep:

F, F2AS,FE2,XK,XM,XE-7,F-1,F-1N, and maybe one of the Olympus.

I'm keeping the F2AS,F-3,FA,FE-2/FE bodies. The XK,XD,XE7,XM a couple XG bodies the F-1N and of course the R-5. Everything else 35mm is going, the Fs FMs etc.

The F-1N and F2 are in different leagues, the best comparison is the F-3 vs F-1N .
The F-2 is huge monstrosity when the motor drive is on it.

 

[benjiboy]

The F-2 is huge monstrosity when the motor drive is on it

So is the Canon New F1 it's a boat anchor with the Motor Drive FN fitted that I always use with a wrist strap not a neck strap because it takes twelve AA batteries and it's too heavy to hang round my neck.

 

[Roger Cole]

Because i almost never use on-camera flash, and when i do, i use a Vivitar 285 with the auto-sensor which works just fine in bounce mode, with any camera.

Well ok. But you can still use it with a camera that has TTL OTF flash metering, it just won't do the TTL OTF thing. You can also use TTL OTF metering with off-camera flash. In fact that's one of its great strengths - you don't need to separate the sensor on the camera from the flash at the end of the cord. I don't know how you'd make it work with multiple flash, wireless slaves etc though. That's probably impossible and really getting outside the intention.

So a camera that has OTF TTL flash metering isn't a liability for you, it's just a feature you won't use.

 

[flavio81]

Well ok. But you can still use it with a camera that has TTL OTF flash metering, it just won't do the TTL OTF thing. You can also use TTL OTF metering with off-camera flash. In fact that's one of its great strengths - you don't need to separate the sensor on the camera from the flash at the end of the cord. I don't know how you'd make it work with multiple flash, wireless slaves etc though. That's probably impossible and really getting outside the intention.

So a camera that has OTF TTL flash metering isn't a liability for you, it's just a feature you won't use.

Yes, i agree. It's not a liability at all. It's just that i don't need it.

To be honest, for studio flash use (which I haven't done in ages), i'd simply use a DSLR to confirm proper exposure/flash balance, and then shoot using the desired camera.

 

[frank]

Instead of the angst 450 posts, I simply own both cameras.

 

[benjiboy]

It's just "different strokes for different folks" all these cameras are capable of the highest standards of work in the hands of the right photographer.