A1 vs F1

<p>Hi,<br /> Just out of interest how does the A1 differ from the F1, in terms of metering?<br /> Thanks<br /> Adam</p>

<p>The F-1 Classics - the F-1 and F-1n - are manual perfection. I consider them the same machine for all intents and purposes, and make no distinction. The standard pentaprism provides a 12 per cent semi-spot metering capability. Useful in many situations, though not the most sensitive. If you want a rugged, dependable, manual machine with a no-frills meter, the F-1 Classics are the way to go. I still use these, both with the onboard meters and handheld meters. If you wanted more sensitivity, you had to go to a booster finder. If you wanted shutter priority AE, you had to go to another finder for that. I've used these accessory finders, but pretty much stopped because there are better ways to get that functionality if you want it.</p>

<p>The F-1N, or New F-1, is a very different machine than the F-1 Classics. The silky smoothness of the F-1 Classic is gone, with the beautiful glossy black paint finish. The F-1N is as rugged and reliable as its predecessor, with a more rugged matte black finish, and can accept a motor and two metering finders, along with a set of focusing screens. You can use it with an AE finder that provides aperture priority autoexposure, and this is best used with a center-weighted average metering screen. I have and occasionally use this functionality. My preferred platform is the F-1N with the standard (manual) exposure pentaprism and a spot-metering screen. Where the F-1 Classics came with a standard 12% semi-spot capability, the F-1N spotmeter screen provides a finer spot that is probably 35% that on the F-1 Classic. It's too tight for use with the AE finder in my opinion, but I really like it for accurate manual metering, so I use the standard pentaprism. Finally, if you mount the F-1N's motordrive, you get an additional option of shutter-priority metering.</p>

<p>The A-1 pretty much tried to do it all with a set of metering modes and much more sensitive meter. Before the A-series A-1 and AE-1, if you wanted a really sensitive meter in your main body, you needed to go to the EF, because the F-1 Classic's meter had real trouble in low light. My sense is that the A-1 really started the trend towards on-board electronics that did everything for the photographer. It went from the manual F-1s to the EF with shutter priority to the AE-1 with aperture priority (a first for Canon), then the A-1 with multi-mode capability. From there you went from auto-exposure to autofocus and all the rest. By the nineties, the 35mm SLR was a thoroughly mature product, and it took the development of quality digital to start the game up again.</p>

<p>The A-1 is a pretty slick machine, but not as rugged as the F-1's. The choice, as always, boils down to personal preference and how much automation the shooter wants.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Interesting that 12% metering in F-1 is called spot metering. I recall reading here some place that anything larger than 2~3% was not spot. Moreover, Canon itself called 9.5% metering as partial metering in EOS 50e (9% in EOS-1N). In similar EOS cameras, 2~3% is called spot metering by Canon.</p>

<p>Regarding the A-1, this camera has shutter priority, aperture priority and manual modes built-in. No need to change finders, as is the case in F-1. However, A-1 won't release the shutter without a battery.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Just to clarify, the A-1 has a number of automatic exposure modes, but only one metering pattern. It meters with a centerweighted averaging pattern which also favors the lower part of the frame to avoid sky-induced underexposure. The meter is very sensitive in low light conditions, operating down to EV -2 at ISO 100.</p>

<p>Auto exposure modes are shutter priority, aperture priority, programmed, stopped-down, and AE flash. Manual override is also possible.</p>

<p>Thanks, I've got an A1 just wondering how the metering compares on each body.<br>

Adam</p>

<p>The A-1 meter is far more sensitive to low light than the original F-1meter, too.</p>

<p>Yeah, further to what Louis said: there is a substantial difference between the A1 and the mechanical F-1/F-1n. The A1 has a modern silicon blue meter cell, whereas both 1970s F-1s use a cadmium sulfide cell. Practically everyone agrees a silicon cell is superior, for a number of well-known reasons including sensitivity. This doesn't mean that the CdS meter in the F-1/F-1n is unusable, and that camera certainly has its fans, so if it works for you, go for it. </p>

<p>I should add that the 1981 F-1N uses a silicon blue cell, like the A1. To my mind the 1981 F-1 feels like a beefed-up pro-level 'A' series camera; it is a very different instrument from its 1971 ancestor.</p>

<p>Canon used the term "Central Area Metering System" for its original F-1 / F-1n's 12% metering design. I don't recall them ever calling it a spot meter per se. To me it was a fantastic system with only two drawbacks- the low light sensitivity and unregulated 1.35V power requirement. Apart from that, a real joy to use and super accurate.<br>

The F-1N has more flexibility, sure, assuming you've got the requisite focusing screens in your pocket with a good time and place to change 'em. In reality it isn't as practical as it looks in literature, but as an accessory selling gimmick it does take some beating. Nice job Canon!<br>

As an early F-1 lunatic I quite enjoy those accessory finders, and have 'em all right here. Nice job Canon!</p>

<p>That makes more sense. I suppose it is just abusing the name of the system by common users that appears to have brought about the term "spot metering" while referring to F-1's metering system.</p>

<p>Although the F-1 is cooler, the A1's meter is reliably accurate even in low light. Frankly, I use a hand meter when I'm shooting with the F-1. </p>

<p>The only time I have heard Spot metering connected to the F-1 series was when talking about a New F-1 with an S* screen. I don't remember until this thread anyone refering to the F-1 or F-1n as having anything to do with spot metering or a spot meter pattern.<br>

I have no problem changing New F-1 screens in the field. No harder then changing a filter on a lens would be in reality.<br>

The OP kinda needs to let us know what he wants compared A-1 to F-1 or F-1n or F-1N</p>

 

<p>I don't know whether there is an exact standard for what constitutes a spot meter. The F-1 meter could be called a limited area meter. Somewhere I have a Sekonic L-208 10 degree spot meter. I originally got it to use with my meterless Minolta Autocord when my Yashicamat 124G was sold. A spot meter is ony as good as the person using it. If I am using print film and meter off of a bright white subject with a spot meter of any angle I will still need to open up two stops if I want that white subject to be reproduced as white and not gray. In tricky lighting I like limited area metering because I know what area I'm metering off. I recently got an F-1N. It came with an AE finder and an AE focusing screen. When shooting in Aperture Priority I miss the AE lock which I have with other cameras like the Minolta X-700. I find myself frequently switching to manual. I still have a good idea of what I'm metering off with the AE screen and I can adjust my exposure from there. My older breech lock and non-Canon lenses will not show their aperture in the finder but the needle and circle give you a good idea of what the meter is recommending and what you have set on the apertre ring. I make more adjustments just looking through the finder with the F-1N and more looking at the aperture ring of the lens with the F-1. I prefer either to the A-1. Maybe when I have the grid screen transplanted into one of my A-1 bodies I will use it more. </p>

<p>Excepting the T90 (which has amodern metering system and of course multi-spot) I find the New F1 to be easier to meter with than the A1 (I have owned both since the early 1980s). As Jeff implies the New F1 is really a manual camera that can be adapted to aperture or shutter priority. The advantage of this is that you can see the difference between what you are shooting at and what the meter suggests. For general use I find the partial metering screen the most useful on the New F1 but i do use the average and spot screen as well. The A1 metering has the same issue as many Canon bodies from thsi period (such as the AE 1) where the center weighted pattern tends to have a bias towars the sky in landscape format shots. Knowing this allows you to compensate but I somehow find the metering one of the weaknesses of the A1.</p>

<p>Canon for a long time was chosen because they offered the partial metering feature.It is fundamental for precision exposure control.It disappeared during the A Series duration then reappeared with the T Series and has been a feature on every EOS (film & digital) ever since.Most others offer it now too so I believe Canon had it right from the beginning.If you can't nail the proper exposure with a F1 and partial metering screen then you really are better off just using a point and shoot for the majority of your serious photography.If you shoot a lot of slide film under difficult lighting you will find a F1 on manual with partial metering is as effective and most times faster than most other types of metering with exposure compensation.Matrix metering is pot luck under difficult lighting.Sounds difficult but shoot a F1 for a month and it will all become crystal clear.</p>

<p>How do I make the most of the metering on the A1? Is the metering accurate? Sorry for my inexperienced questions.<br>

Adam</p>

<p>Adam,<br>

I don't own a A1 anymore but I shoot AE1p's (very similar light metering)and the way I've found too be most effective in difficult lighting is to substitute meter and lock the reading with the meter lock button.The manual that came with the camera explains the procedure quite well.If the scene is average lighting (18% grey) go ahead and let the A1 do it all on automatic for you.</p>

<p>You need to pay more attention to points of interest and how light falls on such points or how it is being reflected. The A-1 has Program, Aperture Priority, Shutter Priority, and Manual.<br>

I get closer to the subjects to take a reading with the A1 if I want its meter to behave like a spotmeter used from a distance. I would point the lens at some portion of the scene you want to take a photo of, making sure to meter for the highlights with slide film and meter for the shades for Black and White negative film. With color negative film, I also pay attention to place more emphasis on the main subject's illumination.<br>

Weightwise, the A1 is much lighter than the F1.</p>

 

<p>Watch out for the shutter squeak problems in older A-1's. You're better off with an F-1 new, metering aside. The best "system" manual camera for my money, and I shot in Vietnam with a lot of Leicas and Nikons.</p>

<p>Sorry, this response turned out to be a book, and the poor A1 only got mentioned once or twice. You might just skip it if long winded replies chap your shorts... :)</p>

<p>Dave S mentioned that he thought the New F1 felt more like an A1, than the older F1 series cameras. I don't get that at all. The New F1 is an F1 in all respects, and the A1 is something quite different. To each his own, I suppose, but long before I could afford one, I did my apprentice time as a bench tech repairing the very first generation F1, and on up from there it went. Today, I have examples of each for display, but the New F1, in my book, no matter how I measure it, is by far the best of all F1 cameras. I know that many people lament the passing of the mirror lockup lever, but that never bothered me at all, as I never really needed the feature in the sense of it being a show stopper. If I ever do, I'll press my old FTb into service. All of my FD macro accessories fit it fine. Still, I have never been forced to resort to that. I mostly use the New F1 with a motor attached, and it's total mass exceeds that of my RZ67. Mirror vibration isn't a big concern on the New F1.</p>

<p>The New F1 is a stellar evolution of the original F1 in all respects. It is F1 perfection in mechanical quality at both the design, and build levels. It offers unprecedented shutter accuracy and durability, a perfect blend pure mechanical operation aided by the most advanced camera electronics of it's day (it's basic electronics are still current, including metering function, and battery choice!), while retaining very good mechanical control fallback in dead battery situations. The New F1 is far better weather sealed than the older models, and it's electronic circuitry is entirely coated in military grade weatherproofing polymer that has been performing it's job without breakdown to this very day (and making soldering connections after teardown a real PITA).</p>

<p>Even the internal switch contacts and brushes of the New F1 are more robust than in previous versions. They were developed in response to problems identified with previous models. The focusing screens are brighter, as are the choices available. The finders are far more refined, as is the motor system, and allow what is essentially an anvil-tough block of advanced mechanical engineering to fully integrate all of the several basic types of AE with a twist of a knob, including metering circuitry that is faster, more accurate, still leading edge, and covers a greater basic range without bulbous attachment finders as in the older series F1 cameras. It is true that the film transport was as smooth as butter on the older cameras, but the latest F1 is geared to allow the same amount of internal work to be completed in a much shorter stroke, with a much more ergonomic lever standoff, size, and shape. In order to do the same amount of work more quickly, and with less thumb motion, the laws of physics dictate that more effort will be required. It is not that Canon reduced quality to cause the New F1 winding lever to feel less smooth than the old. It is the trade-off needed to get to the next frame a bit faster every time. I'll take faster, and better thumb feel over silky smooth any day, that being the case.</p>

<p>The New F1 is still a slab sided metal brick, but it now has a proper hotshoe (where it belongs), and the new battery cover/action grip makes it much more comfortable to hold when a motor isn't attached. OK, that's my F1 rant for the day. I love them all, but I see red when newbies are talked into buying an older model over the New F1 because they get the impression that the old models are very different, and all around better. That's just not true at all, as I see it. Nostalgia is a fine thing, and I am very fond of the older F1 cameras, but I just cannot think of anything about them compared to the New F1 that would cause me to pull an old model out of the display case, and trade it's position there with the New F1 that I still use regularly to this day.</p>

<p>Then again, for many people, an F1 might not be the best FD camera choice at all. The A1 was (is) a fine camera on it's own, and has many modern features. It isn't as refined in build as an F1, as it was still a pretty early example of it's concept, and there were growing pains to be encountered along the way. Still, a good A1 is a fine battery only FD camera even today.</p>

<p>My favorite battery only FD camera by far is the T-90. That was the all-out, no holds barred manual focus masterpiece of Canon design and execution at the time, and it still holds it's own against most any camera in terms of feature set and durability if AF is excluded. In fact, it's basic form, and control concept continues to be the foundation concept for all modern (D)SLR's nearly 25 years later. To me, the T-90 is the ultimate Canon FD body design, and it must be a particular point of pride in the corporate history of Canon, considering that it was on the market for only a single year before EOS arrived. It was too important a milestone to skip over, even though it's lens mount would become obsolete within a year of becoming market ready.</p>

<p>I'm glad Canon took the financial hit to show the world what they had been up to with the T-90, and gave the FD crowd a timeless gem that would keep their FD lenses feature current with the best AF film cameras for as long as film remains in production. Even the shutter unit of the T-90 was purpose built for that model, and was likely the most expensive shutter Canon ever designed/built to that point. It has turned out to be a nearly bullet proof unit over the years, and many recent shutter units still share elements of it's ground breaking design. Thirty seconds to 1/4000 sec, plus B (without battery drain in B!!!). Vertical curtain motion, 1/125 sec X sync. No sticky bumpers, no squeaky wheels over time. It uses electro-magnetic control, and is designed to minimize friction, as well as deal with remaining friction points in the best way, not the most economical way. The shutter unit of the T-90 is a modern marvel in every sense. It even introduced new factory test gear to meet it's requirement for higher than the current industry standard tolerance for shutter speed variation during service/adjustment. The interim solution was timing the shutter with an oscilloscope, which I have done many times over the years, and I have always been amazed at how finely individual shutter speeds of the T-90 can be tweaked, as well as how stable they are afterwards. As in the case of the metering system , I suspect that Canon stepped up and paid for the rights to the best shutter tech available at the time, handed those bits to their their own engineers, and sent them on a mission to make a corporate engineering statement to the world. They nailed it...</p>

<p>Outside of the special appeal of the all, or mostly mechanical FD jewels like the F1 series of cameras, nothing else with an FD mount even comes close to the T-90 in functionality, reliability, and in shooting comfort. It also uses only 4 AA batteries for up to 5 FPS shooting in basic form, and considering it was only built in 1986 (I think that's when I bought it), it's "command back" not only performs most modern functions like intervalometer settings, timers, frame counts, and data recording, it still displays the correct date today in 2010! Don't forget the available series of interchangeable laser matte screens, and selective metering to suit any palate with a button press. I think I might like the T-90 too much......</p>

<p>This is a shot of my most often used FD bodies today. All are ancient in camera terms. I bought the T-90 new, and the F1 has been with me for decades. The FTb is the oldest of the group, and is a "consumer" camera, but it still works perfectly (aside from having to modify the meter circuitry to suit a new style battery).</p>

<p><img src="http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4020/4444077035_f6719b7bcc.jpg" alt="" width="500" height="375" /></p>

<p>the meter on the A1 has been accurate enough for me, and i predominantly shoot slide film with it. it takes some time to learn its intricacies (both the meter and the particular film) but its been good enough for me. i want an F1 though...</p>

<p>A fine trio, Jim. And I love the (irony of the) straps!</p>

<p>i didnt notice that in Jim's picture, but i use an EOS strap for my FD camera as well...</p>

<p>I take it the older FD lenses (breech lock) will fit the latest F1N?<br>

Thanks<br>

Adam</p>

<p>Adam, the entire FD series will mount on the latest F1. I started with Canon back in 1970 or 1971, and still have some of the better lenses I bought in the Breech Lock era. In fact, I have recently purchased FD lenses with the old style mount that offer the best value in their focal length. The Vivitar Series 1 zoom lens shown on my T-90 in the pic above also has a Breech Lock mount, and also has the "A" setting on the aperture ring for shutter priority AE operation with later model FD cameras like the New F1 with a motor drive attached. Aside from lacking that new FD lens feature, the old FD lenses work perfectly on later FD cameras.</p>

<p>By the way, I lied (by accident) about the flash sync speed on the T-90. I claimed that it was 1/125 second, when in reality, it is 1/250 second. I prefer to be wrong when I understate the truth though, so all is well.....</p>