Canon Film Camera

airfrogusmc wrote in post #5734959
Thats nuts...The Canon F-1 in the three different incarnations were around for over 20 years doesn't look like a learning experience to me and the newer F-1 was probably the perfect SLR for professional photographers because you could add the automation if you wanted it or not. One of the MOST STURDY cameras I ever shot with. They are tanks and once you've shot with one you'll clearly see why it was the choice of allot of pros. I owned Nikon Fs & F-3 and ALWAYS preferred the F-1 to both and I never cared for the A-1.

That's interesting. I did shoot with one.

I'm thinking of picking up an F3HP soon. Why would you say canon's F-1 is better?

Thanks

BTW: I did mean the original F-1 was a learning experience.

DocFrankenstein wrote in post #5734979
That's interesting. I did shoot with one.

I'm thinking of picking up an F3HP soon. Why would you say canon's F-1 is better?

Thanks

BTW: I did mean the original F-1 was a learning experience.

The Nikon IS GREAT but I always liked the Canon better. I have a newer F-1 I have had since new been dropped a couple times allot brass showing and I had a new shutter put in a couple years ago. 25+ years and no major problems and very hard usuage. I had problems with the Nikon F-3 about a year after I got it. I found the F-1 to be more reliable and easier to use when shooting manual.

The original F-1 I probably wouldn't touch either. But the F-1n was pretty nice. Interchangeable viewfinders, motor drive options, focusing screens, etc. It was pretty nice for its day, and still is in a lot of ways. But... I still prefer my trusty ol' A-1.

I love my Eos 3. But, if you are going down to the film path, why don't jump straight to medium format? I have done the same you are doing, from digital to 135 film, and from there to medium format. Now I am setting up my dark room. It's a lot of fun!!!

elan 7, 7e, 7n, 7ne all will serve you well and keep your glass interchangeable.

Double Negative wrote in post #5736542
The original F-1 I probably wouldn't touch either. But the F-1n was pretty nice. Interchangeable viewfinders, motor drive options, focusing screens, etc. It was pretty nice for its day, and still is in a lot of ways. But... I still prefer my trusty ol' A-1.

Thats a real shame because if Canon ever made that body with a FF 16MP sensor I'd be all over it. Its probably the things you like about the A-1 that I like about the F-1. Man it is a tank. The newer F-1 is weather sealed and indestructible. Electronics fail take off the motor drive or take out the battery and it still works (no meter). A very dependable camera. I have yet to shoot with any SLR or DSLR that I like better and I've shot with most. The reason I mentioned are the reason allot of pros shot with them well into the late 1990s.

^ True, there's the weathersealing and the ability to operate even on a dead battery. Shooting star trails with an A-1 isn't a good idea; you'll drain the battery and the shutter will close and that's that. Good points... I guess I just like the A-1 because it was my first SLR and I know it so well, and prefer the "modern" viewfinder.

Double Negative wrote in post #5738230
^ True, there's the weathersealing and the ability to operate even on a dead battery. Shooting star trails with an A-1 isn't a good idea; you'll drain the battery and the shutter will close and that's that. Good points... I guess I just like the A-1 because it was my first SLR and I know it so well, and prefer the "modern" viewfinder.

The A-1 is a great camera. I had its predecessor the EF. The F-1 has a view finder that gives you 99% but what was really important to me was the durability and dependability of the F-1. Its just a real solid camera. INDESTRUCTIBLE. Interesting to see how many of these cameras we're using today will still be fully functional in 25 years without any major repairs. I think the A-1 and the last F-1 were the last of that breed.

The cameras that I've shot with that can take the most abuse were Leica M4, Hasselblad 500C/M, Nikon F and the Canon F-1. Deardorff 8X10 also pretty rugged though I wouldn't recommend dropping it though when the were still here on south Peoria St Chicago even if you dropped and punctured a bellows or cracked the wood Jack Deardorff would repair it NO CHARGE...

DocFrankenstein wrote in post #5733392
I wouldn't recommend a canon F-1

They were a learning experience for canon... and overall there are many better cameras which can be found cheaper.

Spoken like someone who's never really used one. They're every bit as solid as the Nikon F you were touting. Mine's still going strong, as is my New F-1, in my sister's hands.

My first camera was the AE-1 Program in 1982, black body (the only body color acceptable - none of this chrome stuff!). I still think they're a good camera, obviously not as good as the F-1 but still solid. I've also used the A-1 and found it to be solid too.

Can't go wrong with either one of them.

If the OP is really interested in a film camera, go MF (TLR or cheaper Bronica/Mamiya).

airfrogusmc wrote in post #5739483
...Interesting to see how many of these cameras we're using today will still be fully functional in 25 years without any major repairs. I think the A-1 and the last F-1 were the last of that breed.

Digital issues aside, I think you're so right... Things today just aren't built like they used to be. Though I think the 1Dxxx series and L lenses are fairly close to the old ways (part of why I like shooting with them, they're solid). The 1V is also a good'un. Though take out the battery and the party's over. Down the line you'd probably be hard-pressed to find NP-E3 batteries and chargers. I had that problem with the Motor Drive MA w/Ni-Cd pack. Damn battery pack wore out, as they do, and replacing it was difficult/costly. I did replace the internal batteries once with cordless phone batteries from Radio Shack but eventually just got the AA magazine. No more worries. Should also be interesting to see how all these IS lenses hold up LONG term, if Canon won't even support lenses as recent as 1999 anymore (200/1.8, 400/2.8 II, etc.)

Kinda makes you think because Leica and some Hasselblads you can still use lenses that are 30 years old on. But ya can make allot more money when ya keep change'n things all the time. Keep folks stoked to buy the next greatest...

I still use cameras and lenses that are even 50 years old. And sometimes, these old lenses on EOS digital bodies give great results! It is really a lot of fun mixing different technologies, and having so much freedom!

The sharpest most optically perfect lens I own is a 50+ year old Leica 50mm f/2 Summicron. The L lenses I own and have tried don't come close to it's quality. There's a lot to be said for continuing to use old kit.

One of the old workhorses