All Mechanical Canon

<p>Hi, all.<br>

I'd like to introduce myself with a question. <br>

I just started getting into photography after I purchased my first film camera--a Pentax K1000. My favorite thing about it, apart from the awesome photos it makes, is the simplicity. It's all mechanical and the battery is only used for the light meter. After practicing, I may not even need the meter in most situations. <br>

On to my question: What was Canon's best all mechanical camera from the '60s and '70s? I've been researching some of the cameras and would like to one day own an Olympus OM-1, Nikon F2 and Minolta SR-T 101. I believe these are all mechanical cameras that rely on batteries for the meter, but I haven't found a Canon one like them. I've researched the AE-1 and F-1 but those both rely on electronics and batteries for shutter speeds. <br>

Any help would be greatly appreciated and please remember that I am new to these classic cameras. <br>

-Enrique</p>

<p>Try the canon museum, click on dates at the top:<br>

<a href="http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/camera/film/chrono_1956-1965.html">http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/camera/film/chrono_1956-1965.html</a></p>

<p>My favorite from the 70's is the F-1n (second version)</p>

 

<p>Louis, <br>

Thanks for the quick response. The FT QL looks to be fully automatic like the FX and FP but with a Through The Lens light meter. <br>

Does anyone have experience with the FT QL?</p>

<p>The F-1 was the best (only) pro model. There are three versions of it, rather confusingly referred to as F-1, F-1N, and New F-1, though I believe the model marking on the camera itself always just says F-1 for any of them. If your question is really just which of Canon's all-manual SLRs is the best, then surely the F-1 (any version) is it.</p>

<p>However, the F-1 still costs significantly more in today's used camera market than some other perfectly good Canon all-mechanical, all-manual SLRs. The FTb model is also a good choice, and less costly. If you want an FD (open-aperture metering) camera, the F-1 and the FTb are your main choices. If you are willing to consider stop-down metering FL cameras from the '60s, then the FT QL is quite nice. I'm shooting an FT QL at the moment and it's a very pleasant camera to use.</p>

<p>Can I use the F-1 without batteries? Is it all mechanical, (shutter, aperture, film advance/rewind, etc.)?</p>

<p>The best was the Canon F-1 (original) and Canon F-1n. These were total manual. The later Canon F-1N was made all electronic. The other mechanical Canons were the FTb and FTbn (same camera but minor upgrades like seeing the speed in the viewfinder made it into an FTbn. The FTbn is not marked FTbn. You can tell one from the FTb by looking at the advance lever. It has black plastic. Same for the F-1 and F-1n). Also, there is the TX (Also sold as the Bell & Howell FD35). After that you get into the earlier Canon like the FT and the Pellix which use the earlier FL mount lenses and have stop down metering. The Pellix uses a 2-way mirror which doesn't move. You shoot straight through the mirror. Anything older than that you don't want to use except for fun.</p>

<p>canon made great mechanical as well as cameras with electonics.<br>

the a ant t series simple to sophisticated and in the case of the T series very elcvctonic.<br>

sall using the FD mount lenses.<br>

well made.<br>

Nut you already have a "starte" camera in the pentax series using thge K mount.<br>

you have startrf with on camera series, why jump ship and get into a nother series at all?</p>

<p>There is virtually no flaw with the canons, wonderful cameras.<br>

But the same can be said for the pentax K mount cameras.<br>

Your pictures will eb as good despite the slight;ly lower cost of the pentax line and the lenses with fit, of not work fully on the digital pentax camerads<br>

not the same with canon-- they abandoned the fd mount and the eor /rebel seties uses a different incompatible lens mount.<br>

I am sure canon had good reasons to do thais but to you it is a gresat inconvenbience.</p>

<p>the eary canonflaxres should eb considered too old.,<br>

the FT cameras are good but use stoip-down metering which is less desirable.<br>

the ft seried will use later fd lenses in stop-fown metering mode only.<br>

I do not know the way you use and take photos this is a consideration<br>

I own two K mount cameras with metal 1/2000 shutters. one is match pointer the othetr is full auto or manual<br>

I also own two canons an ae-1 that will work automatically<br>

and a t70 they is several steps ahead of thsi but still had a manual mode.</p>

<p>there si really no difference in the photos..</p>

<p>The Original F-1 and F-1n have a battery that only runs the meter. Battery is not needed for operation. The F-1n is a pretty thing too.</p><div></div>

<p>Thanks again, everyone. The F-1 sounds amazing. </p>

<p>One of my favourites, the Canon FP. Built like a brick, not a whiff of things electric, practically indestructible, my idea of a great, totally manual SLR. Apparently they were made in an all-black version, though I've never seen one.</p><div></div>

<p>I, like Rick, also think very highly of the FP and find it intriguing because there is none of that electrical business at all, much like the Nikon F with its standard prism. I also agree that the F-1 is an outstanding camera and a superb choice, with my current favorite being the F-1N, the "new" F-1. While it does use batteries, it has a pretty wide range of mechanical speeds also, from its flash sync speed all the way up to 1/2000s, so that these speeds are still available even if the battery dies.</p>

The F-1 in either version, '71 or '76, is more than simply beautiful, it's a precision instrument and rugged tool.

In keeping with your battery-less preferences Enrique, you'd enjoy F-1 accessories like the interchangeable focusing

screens and viewfinders...of the latter, the truly clever Speed Finder and Waist Level Finder require no power at all.

 

Besides the FP, a list of COMPLETELY battery-less all-mechanical Canon SLR bodies includes the three Canonflexes

(original '59 style, R2000, and RM). These utilized selenium lightmeters in either clip-on style or built-in (RM),

no batteries required! Those are getting on in years, of course, but they can still be very fine shooters given some

TLC. Quirky and a bit oddball too, in other words FUN!

<p>I'll add my voice to the chorus of praise for the F-1. My favourite is the F-1N, but the earlier F-1 (original and later model F-1n) is also a fine example of engineering art, as Louis's picture shows, and a joy to use.</p>

<p>I recently acquired a Nikon F2, and I must say that the F-1 seems to be more solidly and ruggedly built.</p>

<p>Pre-1970 Canon SLR's have sometimes developed partial desilvering of the optical prism, which can result in the appearance of dark patches, blobs, or spots inside the viewing area. These are great cameras, but if you want one, try to establish that the viewing area is clean of these distractions.</p>

<p>I've used an entry-level Canon TX camera on and off since 1977 and it's great. If you need a 1/1000 sec. speed, try the FTb, which also has the handy QL (quick loading) feature. If you have money to burn, go all out for the F-1 and its accessories.</p>

<p>Canon EF can be used without batteries and is an excellente camera.</p>

<p>Canon EF can be used without batteries and is an excellente camera.</p>

<p>I own the latest F1-AE, and I've also owned the previous F-1 (I had both at the same time). I'm sorry I got rid of the earlier F-1, and it's probably the one I'd go for now. It had several advantages over the "current" model:<br>

-mirror lockup<br>

-batteries only for meter<br>

-lighter weight</p>

<p>The latest F-1 has several odd design flaws:<br>

-in AE mode the shutter only goes to 1/1000 instead of the full 1/2000<br>

-no AE lock in AE mode--a fatal and annoying flaw<br>

-mirror lockup deleted<br>

-cumbersome controls for iso and +/- (two hands needed).<br>

-A winder that has a strangely cheap, unsealed plastic door.</p>

<p>All other models of Canon mechanical cameras have felt like cheap consumer cameras to me.</p>

<p>In my opinion, Canon's pre-F-1 SLRs are not especially innovative- in design they're mostly "keeping up with The Joneses" in the consumer-level market, with the Pellix perhaps their most audacious body. (Okay, okay, Canon was an early proponent of hinged film doors and cameras that didn't fission into two parts at reloading time!)<br /><br />In terms of build quality and durability however, these Canons were amazingly well built if judged by the high percentage that remain functional today. In fact, when I find one inoperable it's pretty noteworthy!<br />Simple? Maybe. Unremarkable? Quite possibly. But not at all cheap in build quality- as a camera family they have really passed the test of time.</p>

<p>I've owned a Canon FTbn for decades. It never felt cheap to me. It never failed. It bounced around in my truck as a beater shooter for years. The thing wouldn't die! A couple of years ago, due to it's sheer durability and years of good service, I cleaned it up and gave it a CLA (it's first) and a new leather jacket. I still shoot with it! An unbelievably well made camera.<br>

<a href="../canon-fd-camera-forum/00SdF0">http://www.photo.net/canon-fd-camera-forum/00SdF0</a><br>

<a href="../canon-fd-camera-forum/00SdF0"></a>It will still be making pictures for someone when I'm gone to that great photo lab in the sky. </p>

<p>Louis, I hear they still process Kodachrome "Up There" and St. Pete's got pocketfuls of mercury oxide batteries.</p>

<p>' Does anyone have experience with the FT QL?"</p>

<p>I had one for years I got in the early 70's but later switched to Nikon after Canon dumped the FL/FD mount in favour of the EF, leaving the FL/FD users standing in the cold (yes, that old grudge of many FL/FD users again)</p>

<p>Great all mechanical camera with a non automatic TTL metering system. The metering was activated by pushing a lever on the front rightside of the body, upon which the aperture would close ( and consequently the viewfinder grow dimmer) while a needle would slowly crawl towards a circle to indicate the proper exposure ( to be adjusted by changing aperture or speed). Above the circle was over exposed, under the circle meant under exposed and in the circle was correctly exposed, although finding that out in the dark was quite a challenge ( no LED indicators or the likes)</p>

<p>Only M metering mode, max shutterspeed 1/1000th, X-synch at 1/60th, technically very simple without fancy stuff like A mode, motordrive etc. Later with the FTb with FD mount the metering improved as it could be done with open lens metering ( no more closing the aperture down).</p>

<p>Both FT and FTb were built like bricks, dropped mine from a set of stairs at one time. Mirror was broken, but camera kept working so shot during that evening ( I was shooting pictures during a party) with a vertical crack visible in my viewfinder, didn't affect the pictures which came out fine (try doing that with a modern DSLR)</p>

<p>Gave my FT to a girlfriend at one time, but always regretted doing so afterwards. So a couple of years ago I got a Canon TX just for fun, basically a stripped down FTb with which I can still use the FD 1.8/85mm I held on to all these years.</p>

<p>Here are some pictures I took somewhere in the early 80's of the Talking Heads with the FT and the FL 1.8/85mm and 3.5/135mm</p>

<p> http://www.pbase.com/paul_k/talking_heads</p>

<p>PS the pictures shown of the Talking Heads are bad scans of the original prints and do no justice to the IQ of the FL lenses used</p>

<p>No rangefinder fans here, eh?<br>

Canon P made until ~'61<br>

Canon 7 until ~'68<br>

But I agree, the F-1 and F-1n are the cat's meow.</p>

Hey, I like those too T Kim (with a VI-T, P, and 7) but it seemed like the OP was angling for an SLR? Maybe we got

that wrong...

<p>Enrique, I am selling my Minolta SRT 101 - I am its only owner. Email me at bpfeifer@nwi.net to discuss off forum if you have the interest.</p>