My new New F-1

[eli griggs]

Some dumbbell weights for a few weeks will handle the load, somewhat, but other issues like rotator cups, arthritis, nerve damage etc, can interrupt those intentions for better weight/F-1 handling.

I also have my F-1 ae wearing a motor winder.

I bought one here, for the F-1n in an 'as is' condition, but, the top grip's shutter button fell apart and I've not been able to recover the pieces.

I guess another one is on my watch list, so I keep an eye open, as I can.

Sooner or later I likely will find another for parts or straight away uses condition.

 

[benjiboy]

Some dumbbell weights for a few weeks will handle the load, somewhat, but other issues like rotator cups, arthritis, nerve damage etc, can interrupt those intentions for better weight/F-1 handling.

I also have my F-1 ae wearing a motor winder.

I bought one here, for the F-1n in an 'as is' condition, but, the top grip's shutter button fell apart and I've not been able to recover the pieces.

I guess another one is on my watch list, so I keep an eye open, as I can.

Sooner or later I likely will find another for parts or straight away uses condition.

Nobody knows better than I that F1,s are heavy, I have four of them, but I find that because of their weight and the inertia created by it they are much easier to hold still especially for longer exposures.
I often wonder if 35 mm S.L.R. cameras of the quality of Canon F1 cameras were manufactured today how much they would cost.

 

[miha]

Nobody knows better than I that F1,s are heavy, I have four of them, but I find that because of their weight and the inertia created by it they are much easier to hold still especially for longer exposures.
I often wonder if 35 mm S.L.R. cameras of the quality of Canon F1 cameras were manufactured today how much they would cost.

Today's professional DSLR cameras are of comparable quality but far more complex.

 

[DTC]

Complex in terms of electronics and functions, yes, complex in terms of numbers of discrete parts, no at least with regards to pro mechanical cameras. The Nikon F2 has around 1500 parts. Electronics greatly simplified the internals of many cameras for a given number of features. Saw some pics of the shutter mechanisms of the Olympus OM-4Ti (electronic) vs its close sibling, the OM-3Ti (mechanical). The OM-4Ti shutter was much simpler.

 

[miha]

Complex in terms of electronics and functions, yes, complex in terms of numbers of discrete parts, no at least with regards to pro mechanical cameras. The Nikon F2 has around 1500 parts. Electronics greatly simplified the internals of many cameras for a given number of features. Saw some pics of the shutter mechanisms of the Olympus OM-4Ti (electronic) vs its close sibling, the OM-3Ti (mechanical). The OM-4Ti shutter was much simpler.

The Nikon F4 is made of up about 1750 parts http://ss-it.de/data/prospekt/F4.pdf

 

[eli griggs]

Today's professional DSLR cameras are of comparable quality but far more complex.

We might want to rethink words like "quality" when comparing the beautiful, durable, excellent F-1n or N ae to here today and in a year or two, forgettable digital cameras.

A huge part of the quality of an F-1, any generation but especially the F-1N, and comparables like the Nikon F, F2AS, Minolta Autocord or Hasselblad, etc, is their ability to endure heavy use, repairs, and their basic electronics.

Compared to even the best digital cameras, I and others don't really see that happening.

 

[miha]

For me, the "quality" of a photographic camera is defined by its durability, capability and, to some extent, haptics. "Beauty" is in the eye of the beholder.

 

[benjiboy]

Today's professional DSLR cameras are of comparable quality but far more complex.

Perhaps you are right, I admit I have no experience of today's profession digital cameras, but their Achilles heel in my opinion is in their electronic complexity, and their built in planned obscilecence because of the vulnerability of the electronics in the near future to being updated in the introduction of subsequent models.
I think that in more than thirty years from today unlike the Nikon F 2, and Canon F 1, (many of which after more than thirty years are still useable functional photographic implements), the current professional digital S.L.R cameras will be inhabiting the land fill.

 

[mtnbkr]

Perhaps you are right, I admit I have no experience of today's profession digital cameras, but their Achilles heel in my opinion is in their electronic complexity, and their built in planned obscilecence because of the vulnerability of the electronics in the near future to being updated in the introduction of subsequent models.
I think that in more than thirty years from today unlike the Nikon F 2,( many of which are still up and running) and Canon F 1, the current professional digital S.L.R cameras will be inhabiting the land full.

Maybe. A blogger I follow has a small collection of older Pro and Prosumer DSLRs she regularly uses and they seem to be holding up just fine.

Obviously, none are as old as the film cameras we're discussing, but they're quite a bit older than conventional wisdom says a DSLR's useful life is. She gets good images even with the really old FF 6mp stuff.

In my own stable, my Olympus E-M10 mk3 is over 6 years old and still going strong despite living a semi-rough life. It may not be viable in 20 years, but it's not e-waste yet.

I think the bottom line is that if you're not compelled to chase the latest and greatest, the digital equipment has much longer lives than most realize, and the older stuff can still produce nice images in the hands of people who know what they're doing and know how to work with the gear's strengths and weaknesses.

Chris

 

[88E30M50]

My old Canon 40D is still going strong after 15 years. I don't think that it will outlast my 40-ish year old F-1N though.

 

[benjiboy]

It's not particularly the hardware of digital S.L.Rs that will be broken, but the electronics that will be outdated by the technology.

 

[eli griggs]

It's not particularly the hardware of digital S.L.Rs that will be broken, but the electronics that will be outdated by the technology.

I guess it's a matter firsts; first the outdated software, hardware, failure of the mechanics.

Merry Christmas.

 

[88E30M50]

It's not particularly the hardware of digital S.L.Rs that will be broken, but the electronics that will be outdated by the technology.

That's exactly what I'm seeing with the 40D. It still shoots as well as it ever has but that pales in comparison to what a 90D can do. Still, it does what I ask of it and the quality it can produce meets my needs. My energy and efforts are focused on the F-1N though.

 

[cerber0s]

It's not particularly the hardware of digital S.L.Rs that will be broken, but the electronics that will be outdated by the technology.

Surpassed by new technology != broken.

 

[mtnbkr]

Surpassed by new technology != broken.

Exactly!

As long as a digital camera outputs an image in a format my computer can understand via media I have hardware to read, said camera will be functional until it actually breaks.

Otherwise we might as well declare anything developed before a decade ago "broken".

Chris

 

[88E30M50]

Exactly!

As long as a digital camera outputs an image in a format my computer can understand via media I have hardware to read, said camera will be functional until it actually breaks.

Otherwise we might as well declare anything developed before a decade ago "broken".

Chris

That's where I'm at right now. The 40D mentioned above gives me a good enough image to work with for the home printing that I'll do with it. One day, I'll upgrade and pass this one down but for now, it scratches the digital itch I get when I am impatient with my film pics.

One thing that really comes across for me, even with the 15 year old 40D, is that I am much more a part of the picture process with my F-1, A-1 or other film camera. When I get a really good shot with the F-1, I feel like I made that shot come about. When I shoot digital cameras, I feel less like I made the shot than I do with film. Sure, I can shoot a digital camera manually but the experience is nothing like it is with a good film SLR in my hand.

 

[benjiboy]

We might want to rethink words like "quality" when comparing the beautiful, durable, excellent F-1n or N ae to here today and in a year or two, forgettable digital cameras.

A huge part of the quality of an F-1, any generation but especially the F-1N, and comparables like the Nikon F, F2AS, Minolta Autocord or Hasselblad, etc, is their ability to endure heavy use, repairs, and their basic electronics.

Compared to even the best digital cameras, I and others don't really see that happening.

I noticed too Eli that on the used camera market because they have a better designed light metering that uses a beam splitter in the focusing screens of both the F 1n, and the F 1N, and the meter isn't in the prism like the Nikon F 2, it's in the camera body ,there's a hell of a lot more Canon F1s with functioning, accurate light meters around that I have seen after more than thirty years than any Nikon F2s.
My own 4 Canon F 1 bodies light meters agree with each other within about a third of a stop when compared with a digital spot meter on a Kodak Grey Card..
As far as I know none of my F1s have ever been serviced since they were manufactured .

 

[eli griggs]

I haven't quantified my meters, F-1, other Canon's, against a grey card and a shutter speed tester, but once I have the time and space free, I will get this important data gathered.

As I mentioned in another post, I have a single mercury battery, it's the correct size for the Canons and other photo kit like the Leica MR-4 meter I wrote about, so the power supply for the F-1n's, and Ftb_ql's I have, will all be from the same source and that's one big variable eliminated.

I expect all these Canon Cameras will have good meters and be withing a stop of each other, they're that well made, but only testing will prove it out.