Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,300   Posts: 1,535,893   Online: 986
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 22
  1. #11
    benjiboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    U.K.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,763
    Quote Originally Posted by yeknom02 View Post
    So, the F-1n is the latest version of the F-1?

    I recently sold my AE-1, so I may want to get an F-1 of some variety in the future. I'm also trying to sort out the differences.
    No, the F1-N ( N upper case) is the latest version there were three versions http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special...Mozilla-search
    Ben

  2. #12
    darinwc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2,046
    Images
    157
    I've had the ae1, ae1p, a1, and f1n. I don't have the ae1p anymore but if I wouldn't mind having one again. I just met a guy in maui yesterday who had one that he bought new in 1982. Still going strong.
    Go not to the elves for counsel, for they will say both yes and no.

  3. #13
    Tony-S's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Fort Collins, Colorado, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    718
    Images
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by benjiboy View Post
    No, the F1-N ( N upper case) is the latest version there were three versions
    Yup. Original went up to ASA 2000. The revision of this model went up to 3200 and got the 70 degree (I think) winder for film advance/shutter cock. After that the platform changed completely with the F-1N ("New").

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Seattle WA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    215
    I doubt you'd see any difference in .86 vs .8 unless you're doing very precise architectural photography.

    Please read this very informative article on understanding viewfinders
    http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tu...wfinders.shtml

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    55
    Yikes, I haven't been able to check the thread since I posted and it's already 2 pages! Thanks for all the info, especially the bit about the original F-1's quirks. Regarding the magnification, I figured it was a trivial difference but didn't know if anyone had noticed. The coverage was what I was mainly interested in.

    In regards to the degree of mechanical vs electronics on the New F-1, I was under the assumption that only the meter and various AE modes were electronics dependent, and that if using only manual exposure, that it was otherwise a mechanical camera with mechanically controlled shutter and all (especially since it works with no battery, albeit meterlessly). Am I mistaken? All the literature I've read seemed to indicate that it's essentially a mechanical camera with some bonus features that use an electronics package, as opposed to the AE-1P, which won't even fire the shutter without a battery.

  6. #16
    vpwphoto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Indiana
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,107
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    7
    The New F1 was a class so far beyond the A series cameras. F1N being battery dependent is overcome by caring an extra battery. I owned an orignal F1 F1N and F1 (1986 version). The early F-1 was clunky but better than a Nikon F. The F1n was pretty nice, the Electric F1 was so nice and buttery smooth. I'd love to have kept it (latest F1), but at the time I traded them all for a Nikon n90s system..

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    55
    Quote Originally Posted by vpwphoto View Post
    The New F1 was a class so far beyond the A series cameras. F1N being battery dependent is overcome by caring an extra battery. I owned an orignal F1 F1N and F1 (1986 version). The early F-1 was clunky but better than a Nikon F. The F1n was pretty nice, the Electric F1 was so nice and buttery smooth. I'd love to have kept it (latest F1), but at the time I traded them all for a Nikon n90s system..
    Like I said, I was under the impression that it wasn't battery dependent. However, I just thought of another question! If the new F-1's electronics are indeed a dominant factor, are they so integrated with the mechanical mechanisms that even if the shutter still fires, would a failure of the electronics turn the camera into a paperweight? I'd also be interested to know if the meter is integrated into all of those electronics or if it's "standalone" so to speak. Meaning that even if those circuit boards fail, is the meter separate, as with the previous fully mechanical versions whose meter was the only electronic component. Sorry to be annoying with all the questions, I just don't want to drop the dough on a new (old!) F-1 if it's no better than my AE-1 if its electronic features go! They seem to be still commanding stiff prices in comparison to the A series bodies and the older Fs.

  8. #18
    Markster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Denver area
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    307
    It's military grade.. Just because it has circuits in it doesn't mean it's fragile. It still has the F1 reputation, it's still very solid. It still stands up to massive abuse (more so, with the seals on the new model).

    Doesn't matter if it takes a battery or has electronics in it or not... It's one of the most rugged cameras ever made, electronics or not.
    -Markster

    Canon AE-1P 35mm | 50mm/f1.8 FDn | 28mm/2.8 FD | 70-200mm/f4-5 FD | 35-70mm/F2.8-3.5 Sigma FD

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    northern england
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    600
    Quote Originally Posted by mtngael View Post
    I just don't want to drop the dough on a new (old!) F-1 if it's no better than my AE-1 if its electronic features go! They seem to be still commanding stiff prices in comparison to the A series bodies and the older Fs.
    As a sweeping generalisation, LED cameras can be fixed, LCD cameras are landfill once they play up, or so I've been lead to believe. The longevity of A-Series cameras is far greater than their designers probably envisaged and longer than any consumer plastic camera has right to. They were also produced by the zillion and many were looked after by careful amateurs, so picking a good one up isn't difficult but they can suffer from mirror bearing lubrication problems, which is a straightforward fix.

    Canon F1s by contrast, were always rarer beasts than F series Nikons and the ones that fell into pro hands are often very tired. The ones that are clean and fresh appear to command very high prices. I'd like an F-1 but pragmatism suggests the premium is high over A-series Canons but also over F series Nikons, at least in the UK.

    Later bodied pro cameras of all makes are susceptible to the same electrical gremlins as their amateur brethren, only the bodies are more durable.

  10. #20
    Paul VanAudenhove's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Nova Scotia
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    350
    The shutters on the first two versions of the F-1 (F-1 and F-1n) are mechanical. The New F-1 (or F-1N) uses a shutter that is electronically controlled for half of it's speeds. If the battery or electronics fail on the first two versions, all you lose is the light meter.

    The Canon F-1, in any version, was the top line pro camera from Canon at that time. I would be more concerned about past use of any individual camera vs which version to get. As you know, the New F-1 is the latest of the three versions.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin