Lightest canon full frame body

<p>Does anyone know which Canon full frame camera has the lightest body?</p>

<p>Thomas, if you're looking for an EOS digital body your question is better asked in the Canon EOS section.<br>

Here in the FD group all our cameras are full-frame (i.e. film), but we do not do lightweight!</p>

<p>I hope you are talking about film bodies here because in that regards they are all full frame unlike the crop sensor digital bodies.If you are talking digital tour the Canon EOS Forum because the full frame vs crop sensor issue will drive you crazy and a lot of us FD guys remain FD guys for that very reason.One of the lightest Canon film bodies is the T50 (the T60 is not made by Canon and has numerous build issues).The T50 is made mostly from plastic and was a testbed for the EOS film series too see how well plastic would hold up in consumer hands over time.If you are talking full metal frame one of the best choices would be a AE1p.Many FD owners who shoot F1N's slip one of these in their carry bag as a back up because when you are dealing with a 30 year old camera things do break at times.Most backups are determined by compatible battery and flash usage thus F1N/AE1p (same flash gun PX28 battery,T90/T70/T50 (similar workable flash gun AA battery).I hope this info helps.</p>

<p>Probably would be the T50. All FD cameras are full frame since they all use 35mm film.<br>

They didn't make any FD cameras that took crop film.</p>

<p>Just for kicks:<br>

Canon F-1n + Motor Drive MF + Servo EE Finder + FD 85mm f/1.2 L = 6.54 lbs<br>

Canon EOS 1V + EF 85mm f/1.2 L II = 5.90 lbs<br>

both with film and batteries</p>

<p>F1N 795g<br>

T90 800g<br>

T70 530g<br>

T50 490g<br>

A1 620g<br>

AE1p 575g<br>

AL1 490g<br>

AV1 490g<br>

AE1 590g</p>

<p>Well actually since he does not specify SLR then his phrasing is correct. Canon Made 1/2 frame cameras And APS film bodies both with smaller then full frame.<br>

And the lightest Full frame Canon would not be any FD body but one of the Snappy line or possibly one of the other compact point and shoots. The Snappy EZ is 195 grams</p>

<p>Why was the T90 nicknamed "The Tank"? ;-)</p>

<p>The Japanese Photography Press named it that because it was supposed to be so durable. And because it's design was so advanced.</p>

<p>To be fair, the quoted weight of the F1N at 795g is a bit misleading compared to a camera like the T-90. The quoted F1 weight is stripped, and without even a viewfinder in place. A more "apples to apples" comparison would be with the full 6 lb F1 + motor drive set with AE finder FN on top. In practical use, the T-90 is a featherweight compared to a similarly functional F1.</p>

<p>A fully armed F1 compares better to the RZ shown here... :).<br>

<img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2736/4363414577_ff07f8da46.jpg" alt="" /><br>

<img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2753/4358421187_e41178cc05.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>Maybe they should of nicknamed the T90 the F -16 (advanced and fast) and the F1N the B -52 (deliver the payload under any brutal condition)?Personally I never understood that Japanese analogy because the F1 was the one built like a tank and kind of looked somewhat like one too.F1N was the end of one era and the T90 was the gateway to a new one.Drop each one from two foot on a hardwood floor a half dozen times and guess which one would deserve the "Tank" nickname.......I know this is way off subject but every once in a while we need to lighten (no pun) up on the FD Forum.</p>

<p>The F-1N would be dented up the T-90 would have bounced<br>

the shell on the T-90 is amazingly tough<br>

I can't think of a single one I have seen with a crack in the body.</p>

<p>And since the extra MASS of the F-1N would make it hit the ground harder it would also be possible if it hit on the viewfinder to near destroy the F-1N Or to bend the rewind crank.<br>

Lots more stuff hanging out on a F-1N to get bent dented or damaged.</p>

<p>The lightest full frame FD body was that T60 with the missing sensor and electronics!</p>

<p>I don't know Mark.I once had my F1N fall out a Domke bag and roll down two flights of hardwood steps and the only damage was a dented pentaprism that my CLA shop was able to disassemble and pound out the dents to original perfection (the guy is good).The other option was to replace it with a $50 E bay one in less than 30 seconds.On the other hand my T90 has gone through 1 battery compartment door,3 battery holders,gave up on command back lcd's due to bleeding, one shutter replacement,and a erratic mirror return stop that caused me many a unfocused shots until the CLA guy figured out what was causing the problem and it never took a tumble in its life (so far).I don't even want to talk about my life with plastic EOS bodies and lenses.Then again maybe I just been lucky/unlucky.Or cursed. </p>

<p>I dropped my T-90 out of the car onto cement yesterday.... I'm really hoping that Tank reputation proves to be true.</p>

<p>Jim - that T90 looks very pretty in the picture. Is that an original eyecup?</p>

<p>RE the eyecup question, yes it is. That eyecup has been there since day one. The funny thing is, I just went to take a pic of it in my hand, and it's not on the camera..... Oops.. I was out at a local lake this weekend, and used a right angle finder for some close up wild flower color shots, and the eyecup never made it back on the T-90. It's fine though, as it is in a camera bag somewhere. The reason I was going to shoot it is because it is a very comfortable 3-D design that fits faces and glasses, yet doesn't deform like older "tulip" style single layer cups, nor does it seem to suffer from rubber rot.</p>

<p>Mark mentioned the toughness of the T-90 body plastic. I will attest to that. My first T-90 was broken when my vehicle was robbed of the diving gear loaded in it the night before I was to head out on vacation (someone knew where to find free diving gear that rainy night... Some friends might be less than reliable...). The T-90 was on the front seat, under some clothing, and the thieves knelt on it, sat on it, and pretty much stomped it while he-they were grabbing diving gear out of the back of the vehicle. They never knew the camera was there. The next morning, I discovered the mess, and found that the camera was still there. The internal frame where the grip-housed motor attached to the base chassis was sheared off, and wobbled, but the plastic shell was intact. All the body covers are black polycarbonate with the interior flashed with copper to form a conductive electro-magnetic shield.</p>

<p>I grew up in my teens as an apprentice bench tech repairing Canon mechanical FD cameras, and my old boss was kind enough to send me the T-90 microfiche repair manual (what a PITA microfiche readers were). When I returned from my vacation, I tore down my broken new T-90, and after re-soldering what seemed to be dozens of wires torn from solder pads on the flexible circuit boards that cover the interior of the T-90, and (honestly) using liberal quantities of epoxy to make a permanent fused unit of the motor, the stripped screw holes, and broken motor mount flange on the main chassis after clamping everything into proper alignment.</p>

<p>The camera worked perfectly after surgery. There was no sign of damage from the outside at all. I don't know if the T-90 was the first use of that grade of polycarbonate for Canon, but I do know that it made me a believer. I am also of the group that never laid eyes on a cracked T-90 shell. The color is full depth as well, so no more brassing. My first T-90 was covered as a total loss by my insurance carrier the day I reported the theft, so I already had the one in the photo above as a replacement when I went on my two day delayed vacation, and a fellow diver/photographer ended up talking me out of my "epoxy reinforced" T-90 a year or so later. It might still be out there. It might be yours..... Do you have a T-90 with a Command back 90 that seems to be an ounce or two heavier than it should be????</p>

<p>No kidding folks. I always joke that I can likely use an F1 to drive tent pegs into permafrost in a pinch without compromising it's ability to take photographs, but I KNOW that the T-90 is a tank.... In over 24 years of banging them around for work and pleasure, I can assure you that they bounce very well, and keep asking for more....</p>