The reason to move to a 1N would be how fast and durable the camera is, not image quality. As long as a body holds the film flat and mounts the lens the proper distance from the film (and has a properly working shutter, of course), image quality will be identical. I would trust all Canon and other name-brand cameras to do this.
What might be different between bodies is the quality of your shooting, due to certain features either helping you or distracting you. For instance, I find that in general I prefer my 1976 F-1 over my 1972 F-1 because of the shorter advance stroke and different shape of the advance lever, the fact that the meter can be set up to EI 3200, and because the battery check switch is momentary, so it cannot be accidentally left on. I prefer the '72 over the '76 when using flash, because the PC synch. is finicky on the '76. Each has different quirks, so each will distract you with slightly different considerations and possibly cause you to shoot a little differently in certain scenarios. Due to features, I prefer both of these cameras to my FTb, however, technical image quality is identical.
Last edited by 2F/2F; 11-18-2008 at 08:31 PM. Click to view previous post history.
"Truth and love are my law and worship. Form and conscience are my manifestation and guide. Nature and peace are my shelter and companions. Order is my attitude. Beauty and perfection are my attack."
- Rob Tyner (1944 - 1991)
A camera body is like any other tool - if it is well designed and suited to you and your needs, it can add to the quality of the photographs.
To my mind, the two features of a camera body that are most likely to impact the quality of the image are:
1) the viewing system - is the image bright, contrasty and easy to focus, and does it accurately indicate what is actually on the resulting negative or slide?; and
2) are the ergonomics of the camera (which of course includes the lens) such that you can easily hold the camera still, and operate all the necessary functions, without causing camera shake, or incorrect focus or exposure, or awkward winding?
The 1N is a beautiful machine to work with. I changed up from an EOS 5 after using a 5 for 11 years. The 1N is quite a revelation, particularly its precision of metering, but what I really like about it is the power drive booster E1 taking 8 lithium batteries (being very lighteight and unaffected by cold), which have been in use now for 5 years (!). At grassroots level, though, the camera body is a secondary consideration and your first point of attention should be lenses. All the camera body does is hold/wind/rewind and expose the film for you. Once you're happy with the lens(es) you're using (and Canon's 'L' series are wonderful, when used and understood correctly) you can pay attention to the body. My thoughts are that years of experience working with each camera system will eventually make you see just which one you really like and can settle with over a long period of time. I've used all the systems and settled on Canon as far back as the T90 in 1988, before briefly going to Minolta and Nikon and finally back to Canon. Personally, I don't want anything more from a camera body than what the EOS 1N offers me. Anything more just complicates and bogs down my contemplative approach to photography.
.::Gary Rowan Higgins
A comfort zone is a wonderful place. But nothing ever grows there.
Okey doke, you've got my attention. Care to elaborate on that italicized part?
Originally Posted by Poisson Du Jour
I find "pro" bodies are more durable and last longer before breaking down.
All things being equal -- two normally functioning cameras -- you'd be hardpressed to see a difference. The difference, IMHO, comes a year or two or ten down the line (depending on how much wear you put the camera through).
Quality wise re: your images, as JBrunner says, there's no appreciable difference beyond the "el cheapo" line.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
I once had a mint-looking Pentax Spotmatic and a set of mint lenses. I never got a single sharp picture because of the fact that the camera's vibration level had risen with age (even though operating noise was normal and there were no visibly damaged components). The same lenses used on a Leica with an adapter gave beautifully sharp results.
...mental and physical health and the amount of alcohol, caffeine...
Originally Posted by darinwc
I'm sure I heard that same advice offred on a "Dr Ruth" programme...
Originally Posted by keithwms
Ja, you don't know vat you really vant until you have it in ze hands!
Originally Posted by Steve Roberts
Weight may be an issue. If it is too light you may move it too much if hand held. A heavier camera needs more inertia to get it moving so you should be able to hold it steadier.
"People who say things won't work are a dime a dozen. People who figure out how to make things work are worth a fortune" - Dave Rat.