I review the Canon F-1, the root of Canon's pro line.

[AgX]

This is fairly common on medium format, but on 35, people try to squeeze extra frames. (Me, I wish they still made 18 exposure 35mm rolls, since 24 or 36 are just way too many.). My Canonet QL17 GIII also advances to the first frame without using the shutter.

The shortest version I know was 135-10, made by Agfa in the 80s.

 

[cooltouch]

Oops, time for a changing bag. This has happened to me only once and it was on a camera with a motor drive that jerked the film off the spool. I was very surprised because 35mm film is usually very firmly secured to its spool. But that lone incident was not enough to keep me from using the entire roll. In fact, I've always tried to get that extra shot or two from a 35mm role that is sometimes possible. And if I'm using a motor drive that has a counter, I'll make sure the counter is set, which further reduces the chance that the film end will get pulled from its spool.

 

[abruzzi]

You've obviously never had the unpleasant experience of overwinding the film in the heat of the moment in the middle of a wedding or important paid gig and pulled it out of the cassette I have had in the past since then never shoot more than 33 on a 36 exposure film.

Thankfully not. I always photograph for me, and never for anyone else. I have had the experience of shooting 10+ frames that I didn't care about just to get to the end, sometimes even rewinding the roll before I hit the end, or leaving my roll in the camera for a month or more, just because I can't finish the !%*#! roll.

 

[Theo Sulphate]

One can always bulk-load the length desired.

Since I couldn't afford to buy film in my younger years, a friend gave me a 50' roll of expired Versapan film which I would load into reloadable plastic cassettes in my closet at night (I didn't have a bulk-loading device). Typically I'd measure out about 18-20 exposures.

Today, I'd be happy with about 10 - that's usually how many photos I make of a subject. Medium-format 6x9 gives me 8 - perfect.

One of these days I'm going to get some take-up cassettes and use them in my Exaktas, just so I can use the film cutting knife to produce a short-exposure roll.

 

[abruzzi]

One can always bulk-load the length desired.

I only have one bulk loader at the moment, but for whatever is loaded in there, thats exactly what I do. Usually about 18-20 exposures, which is perfect for an hour walk. If you mail off for developing, which these days charges the same no matter the number of frames, I can see the economic benefit of 36 exposures--$20 for 18 exposures vs $20 for 36 is double the price. But developing at home is so cheap, that it doesn't really matter.

 

[AgX]

One of these days I'm going to get some take-up cassettes and use them in my Exaktas, just so I can use the film cutting knife to produce a short-exposure roll.

There are more GDR cameras that take a type 135 cassette instead of a take-up spool, but then you lack the built-in knive and instead must help yourself.

 

[kestersonn]

A couple of things:
You wrote, "The F-1 had that awkward rewind-side-mounted flash contact similar to the Nikon F, F2, and F3, so this is a welcome addition when I use a flash." As you can see from the picture below, only the Nikon F has a side mounted flash port as the F2 and F3 are in front.

Thanks for reading and commenting. I tried to stay a little vague on technical details and put more into the user experience to avoid messing something up. But as a few readers have pointed out, I mistyped or misquoted a few things. As far as the flash comment, I was talking about the place where the flash mounts, not the PC contact. My Nikon F/F2/F3 require the flash to mounted on the left over the rewind knob. So I probably should not have said "contact" but instead "mount." I think most users of these Nikons got what I meant.

You wrote, "This is Canon’s first attempt at a pro-level camera." No doubt the Canonflex was not as successful as the Nikon F is a gross understatement but nonetheless it was Canon's first attempt at a pro level SLR.

True enough on the Canonflex, but I'd argue that it was not a true system camera when introduced. It only had two auto diaphragm lenses, no interchangeable screens, etc. that the Nikon F did have. So in light of that, I probably should have said that it was Canon's first attempt at a pro-level camera since the Nikon F was introduced.

Again, thanks for reading and offering your comments. Now everyone knows a little more.

 

[kestersonn]

I would love to know which lens you used for the Jasper shot. The bokeh is to die for, and, though I'm a Canon FD fan, not all lenses have a fantastic bokeh. Perhaps I do hace that lens.

Thanks for reading! Jasper is by my side right now I used the 50mm/1.4 FD lens. It's a later model one. I find myself blessed with a few of them as well as a few 50/1.8s. I gave one of those to a young man getting into film for the first time to go with a Canon FT I just sold him.

 

[kestersonn]

I suppose putting it out in sunlight for a few weeks would solve the issue, just as with some of the 50/1.4 Super Takumars.

I have greatly reduced yellowing on the Takumars with a gooseneck high intensity LED lamp from IKEA. Just put face down on foil and position the LED lamp directly over. Leave for a few days, then flip over and repeat. The sunlight trick didn't work very well for me.

 

[kestersonn]

Of course if you are looking for a camera to take with you on skydiving excursions and the like, then I suppose something more rugged is required.

Ha ha! I'm over that skydiving phase...not that I was ever in it. I trust metal over plastic any day. I've just been frustrated one too many times with a critical plastic part breaking. Plus, the F-1 has much more going for it and a lot of pretty good reviews. Who knows, maybe an AV-1 is in my future. Thanks for reading and commenting!

 

[kestersonn]

I'd have to say that your 50/1.4 would get pretty close. Bokeh looks about right for the 50/1.4, seems to me.

As for the article, I found it to be a very nice work. I've been shooting with the original Canon F-1 for over 35 years. During this time I've come to own many different cameras -- many of which are outstanding photographic tools -- yet the original F-1 is still my favorite 35mm camera, especially the second variant, often referred to as the F-1n. The New F-1 is certainly no slouch of a camera, but I just like the old one better. All the controls are intuitively placed; it just feels right in my hands.

Thanks for reading and commenting. Yes, it was the 50/1.4. Love that lens. A lot of times I just prefer basic, heavy cameras to shoot with. I don't want to have to carry a separate meter with me all the time, so once I know a camera's metering characteristics I can relax and just shoot.

 

[Les Sarile]

So in light of that, I probably should have said that it was Canon's first attempt at a pro-level camera since the Nikon F was introduced.

You notice I stated pro level SLR and not just cameras in general. The reason for this of course is that Canon made pro level cameras in the form of interchangeable lens rangefinders long before it got into SLRs. Of course, Nikon did as well.

I should disclose that my perspective on these marvelous tools is to appreciate them today as well as understand the progression of development.

Nonetheless, still a good read.

 

[AgX]

True enough on the Canonflex, but I'd argue that it was not a true system camera when introduced. It only had two auto diaphragm lenses, no interchangeable screens, etc. that the Nikon F did have. So in light of that, I probably should have said that it was Canon's first attempt at a pro-level camera since the Nikon F was introduced.

In this context we should not overlook that even Nikon did not offer the first System SLR, but it was KW with their Praktina. On the market already in 1953!

 

[TheRook]

I trust metal over plastic any day. I've just been frustrated one too many times with a critical plastic part breaking.

I don't recall ever breaking a plastic part on my cameras. But then, I'm fairly gentle with all my camera equipment; if a lever, knob or switch gets stuck and refuses to move, I don't try to force it. Using brute force rarely ever fixes a malfunctioning camera... more likely, this will only exacerbate the problem, not make it better.

 

[AgX]

It depends on the part , its design and the stress it has to undergo.
For instance:
The top covers of the Practika L-series and and copied by Canon the top covers af the A-series all are from plastic. I have come across countless samples of both but yet not seen a single sample with cracked cover.
The same time the majority of A-1, AE-1 etc. samples have a cracked battery chamber door.

With the top covers the impact can spread over a large area and will be countered by respective elasticity. Not so for the battery door. Futhermore the top covers are from ABS, a tensile material. I still have to find out what material the door is made from.

 

[vlasta]

I still have to find out what material the door is made from.

It behaves like sintered material.

 

[cooltouch]

Hah! I'd owned A-series Canons for years before I finally tumbled on how to open that door. You just push on that little button. That's it. Problem with that button though is it looks like it should be pushed down instead of in, and that's where the breakage comes from. BTW, I've never broken an A-series door, but I've bought a couple that had broken doors. Fortunately it is easy enough to replace and you can find replacements on eBay for cheap.

 

[AgX]

Not quite. There are most different failures of that door, only a few can be related to forcefully opening.
With nearly all samples I easily could open that latch just by slightly pushing-in that knob by fingernail. At one sample, in simultaneous test with other samples, that did not work and I needed a tool, like a ball pen, to push it in.
(This need of a tool even got standard design for film exchange for all kinds AF-compacts...)

 

[cooltouch]

A Series Canons came with a cover for the viewfinder that was stored in the ISO shoe when not in use. That cover has a little tab on the side, which is the Canon tool for opening the battery door. I don't ever seem to have one of those covers handy when I need to open the door though.

 

[AgX]

Most Canons offered used already miss that cover... so here it already begins...
Later Canon models had a rubber shoulder pad to insert such cover in.

 

[benjiboy]

What is apparent to me in retrospect having owned either currently or in the past all the Canon F1 models and the Nikon F, F2 and F3 how much better the Canon F1 cameras were at the time because the Canon Corporation knew that to get a foot into the door of the stranglehold that Nilon had on the professional market at that time they had to come up with a pro.quality camera system that was considerably better than the Nikon Corporation was producing and in my opinion, they did..