Canon A1 - as good as the F1?

Topic.

 

I've seen some good clead A1s for sale. Just wondering if it's a good

camera. It certainly has more gadgety bits in it compared to the F1,

but I don't understand why the F1 is meant to be better.

To the best of my knowledge the A-1 was not as rugged as the F-1. The F-1 was built on a heavier metal chassis with more sealing.

Think of it this way, the F-1 is a tank, the A-1 an SUV. If you don't have need of the armor plating the A-1 should do just fine.

I'm not an F-1 proud owner (not yet at least) but the F-1 has some definite advantages (or differences anyways...)

 

- Match-needle metering

- Modular concept, i.e. camera fits your need, tailor it for the job you want

- Changeable screens and viewfinders

- Build quality was overall better

- Mechanical/hybrid shutter depending on model

 

 

And as the others before me said, it's tougher, although the A-1 can still take a beating. The F-1 is heavier though.

 

How's DOF preview in the F-1? Always wondered about that...

 

Anyways, these are just a few hints. There are many more people here who can tell you more things, and more accurately, than me about the F-1. I like my A-1, it's serving me well although there are some things which are slightly impractical (like the exposure lock button!). I like to consider it as a 'low-budget' equivalent to the F-1 :)

 

 

Pat

I had an A-1 many years ago. It was stolen, and I replaced it with a New F-1, which I still use twenty years later.

 

DOF preview on any of the three versions of the F-1 works pretty much in the same way it does on the A-1.

 

The main issue is that the F-series is designed to stand up to professional use in a way that the A-series is not. On the other hand, you may not need a shutter that can stand to do over 100,000 cycles or a metal chassis, so that extra ruggedness may be of no value to you.

 

Without a battery, the A-1 is a paperweight. The New F-1 still offers a range of usable shutter speeds without a battery.

 

The A-1 has aperture preferred, shutter preferred, and program modes built in. The New F-1 (last version) requires accessories to have these auto exposure and does not offer program mode.

 

The New F-1 offers the possibility of average, partial, or spot metering with interchangeable screens. The A-1 only has average metering and a fixed focusing screen.

 

All the F-1's offer a 5 fps motor drive as an accessory. The A-1 has a 2 fps power winder.

 

Both cameras take the same lenses, so with the same aperture, shutter speed, and lens, you would not be able to tell the difference between photographs made on an F-1 or an A-1 or any other FD-compatible body for that matter.

 

If you want a camera with many of the features of the F-1 built in, but more electronics like the A-1, consider the T-90.

To continue Steven Clark's analogy, If all you are doing is driving to the supermarket, taking the kids to and from school and soccer practice, and going on the occassional camping trip, you are much better off with an SUV than with a tank.

 

The A-1 is not as rugged as the F-1 (any version). Few cameras are. But it's plenty solid for almost any non-professional use. And it has a great range of automation features.

Ah, but David, you forgot the 5 fps Motor Drive MA (with the 12AA battery pack that is).

 

:)

 

Incidentally, I've been looking all over the places near me for one, can't find any. They go for quite expensive (IMHO) on auction sites or KEH...

 

Ah well, back on topic:

 

If I had the $$$, I'd certainly spring for an F-1, for all of David's reasons.

Walking through this discussion about tanks and SUVs, I would sincerely vote for the A-1 not because of its "gadgety" or because a SUV is better than a tank in these days, but because of its versatility and great quality. I guess that all the programs incorporated in the A-1 are really useful even compared with today's advances.

 

F-1 takes adventage in the power supply issue. Having a camera which has the possibility of working without battery is something really great. The capability of changing focusing screens sounds interesting, but maybe some experienced F-1 owners could talk us more about it. I don't feel it would be a heavy reason to vote for the F-1.

 

I also think that the weight is a really an important issue. Less is always better. Then, the point goes to the A-1.

 

F-1 is a great camera, that's why it's a classic, but A-1 is really good. The "low budget" adjective is not what I would use to name one of the most popular cameras Canon made in its history.

The F-1 is more rugged, and as mentioned it has some mechanical speeds available so you won't be dead in the water if the battery goes south. OTOH, the A-1 offers more exposure modes, uses all the same lenses and bellows, has a motor drive available, in short is every bit as much a complete system camera as the F-1. If you are concerned mostly with the image you project to other photographers when you are taking pictures, by all means spend your money on the F-1 and then spend your days wishing you had just one more finder for it. If you just want to take great pictures, buy the A-1 and don't look back.

The F-1 is way easier to check DOF since the lens is not on A, unless you're using TV on the F-1N. Otherwise just push it in or over and it's much easier to use, than the A-1's little belt buckle, lever. On the F-1 you don't even have to remove your eye's from the viewfinder. The A-1 requires you to take the lens off A, stop it down then recompose. If you want to go back to AV or TV before you shoot you return the lens to A, flip the lever back but you're not done, you and have to recock the shutter or you get EEEE EE for an exposure readout.

 

The F-1's ability to change or remove finders. Let's say you need to take your picture from seven feet up. With 98% of all camera you need a ladder to compose. With the F-1 set the exposure, remove the finder and turn the camera upside down holding it over your head. Compose by looking at the exposed focusing screen. This give a whole new perspective to your pics. This trick also works if you want to take a picture from inches off the ground, you don't have to lay down to view your scene or mess with little tiny angle finders. Plus there are several accessory finders and they are specific to any number of needs.

 

The ability to change metering patterns by changing the screen. Granted it may take you two years to find a PK screen for under $125 but it's possible to find one. Spot metering screens are all over $100 each no matter what focusing aid they have. The F-1 also has more focusing screens available and screens made specifically for the lens you are using. Like F and G screens, both microprism centers but the G is for slow lenses like an f/4 zoom. The F screen is for fast lenses like f/1.2-f/2.8. Also J and K are super bright laser matte screens, J is for lenses under 200mm and K is for lenses over 135mm and really for long tele's. These screens definetly help viewing brightness and focusing speed.

 

There are a few reasons to like a camera that is not 100% battery dependent. One that you might overlook is, if you're going to do a lot of flash work you don't even need to turn the camera on.

I have an F-1n (second style -- minor changes over original such as plastic tipped wind lever instead of all metal) and an A-1. I won't reiterate the above comments. One advantage of the increased weight and all metal body of the F-1 is that it is far quieter than the A-1 and much less vibration can be felt when you release the shutter -- therefore it's better for handholding slow shutter speeds. I'm starting to have a hard time finding the lithium cells for the A-1 -- I was informed last month for example that Radioshack has discontinued its version of the cell. The alkaline equivalents don't last very well. I like both. I used the A-1 as my sole camera for several years. If forced to choose, I'd vote for the F-1.

I used A-1s for 15 years with nary a problem. Very user friendly. Controls are simple. You can switch from program mode to aperture priority to shutter priority with a simple control dial.The red LED in the viewfinder tells you everything you need to know at a glance. Solidly constructed without the "plasticy" feel of modern cameras. You need to keep a good battery in it, but it has a blinking light that tells you when the battery is getting low so that you can change it before the need is critical. Batteries last a long time. With the 50mm FD 1.4 lens the viewfinder is clear and bright with three focusing aids, a split image rangefinder, a larger prism around that, and if you are really in a hurry the entire field of view acts as a focusing aid. When I finally sold my last A-1 several people warned me to watch out for a peculiar shutter sqeaking sound. Evidently my camera had that sound, but I never noticed any decline in performance as a result of it. The shutter was noisy from the day I bought it compared to Pentax and Nikon cameras I've owned. That was not a problem for me since I didn't shoot in theaters or other places where camera noise might be noticed. Were it not for the need for autofocus and automatic balanced fill flash I'd still be shooting the A-1. I miss the solid feel of fine craftsmanship inherent in the A-1 and somewhat lacking in newer cameras like my Nikon N70, although I wouldn't go back now that I've been spoiled by the automation of the N70 and its fine performance. The balanced fill flash is nothing short of amazing in my opinion and the autofocus is great too when you are shooting in a hurry. The Canon FD series of lenses are also good examples of fine craftsmanship hard to find these days. Never owned an F1, so can't compare the two.

The A-1 is a great camera. I learned photography in college with an A-1. It did everything I needed and more. After a hiatus in photography, I bought an a used F-1N. It's a totally different beast. Much more solid and heavy. The match needle metering I find more useful than the LED readouts. At least it's easier to tell how many more stops over/under you are in exposure. And the F-1N meters are dead accurate. I have a spot meter screen and use that exclusively for accurate chromes and zone system B&W. The trade off is definately the weight. An F-1N with AE Motor Drive FN (with 12 AA's) and a 135mm/2.5 is quite a burden...monopods and neoprene neckstraps are almost required. Still, its a bulletproof camera that is definately more rugged than me. If you are looking for a decent camera the A-1 should do fine. But if you plan on covering any wars, photographing expeditions in the Himalayas, or just going to any inhospitable climate, then the F-1N is better suited.

Since the PX-28 size cell is used for a number of applications besides cameras I really doubt it if Radio shack stopped selling the cell. According to the kid at the local Batteries Plus store they sell a LOT of these cells to people with dog collars that are used with the invisable fence systems. And anyway you can always order them on line. Get the Silver Oxide version as they are much better suited to camera meters then the alkalines with their wild discharge curve.

 

Oh and a comment was made that the focusing screen on an A-1 is fixed and not changeable. It is in fact changeable though not as easy as the AE-1P or T-90 or F-1 screens but all that is required is to remove one screw in the top of the mirror box and carefully remove and replace the screen with which ever of the 7 different screens Canon made for the A-1.

 

Of the four A-1's I currently have two have the *B* screens 1 has a *C* screen and one has the origional *E* screen. canon recomends that you have the screen replaced by a service tech which I would agree with unless you are fully confident in doing it yourself.As to the bull about Batteries in an A-1 being a problem get real just carry an extra or check it before you go. If you turn off the camera most of the time they last about two years. I have a card on all my cameras that lists when the batteries were installed and on my A-1's it averages 18-26 months for a $8.00 battery. When I shoot in real cold weather I use a pack made from a short wood dowel and two brass thumb tacks with speaker wire attached to each pole and then to a Radio Shack 4) AA battery holder which I keep in my inner pocket and have had no problems with long exposures and cold temps this way cost me all of $6.00 to make.

 

Mark W.Oh by the way I have owned both versions of the Mech F-1's and currently use a F-1N for all my long telephoto work.

Andrew,

 

I've never used an F-1, but I've used an A-1 for almost 20 years (as a hobbyist photographer). It's well-built and plenty heavy enough (given that the F-1 is even more so) but it's a great body for FD/FL lenses.

 

The ultimate accolade - I recently moved to a Nikon F80/N80 (ready for digital in a few years; never forgave Canon for going to EOS mounts!) but I've KEPT my A-1 and two FD prime lenses. Incidentally, I couldn't even part-exchange my third-party telephoto zoom lens!

I never considered getting an A-1, since it lacks match needle manual metering. But the F-1 also has several other advantages. Checking depth of field is very easy. My F-1 usually has a speed finder attached. I can view from above or at eye level by rotating the finder. It takes a second to switch. The special "Bright" focusing screens are incredibly bright. There's no need for a split prism or micro prism since the view is so sharp and clear. The slightly darker center circle shows the spot metering area, so you know exactly what's being metered.

 

PJW

If you are having a hard time finding batteries, go to http://www.photobattery.com - they have the silver oxide ($6) and lithium ($8) batteries for the A-series Canons, and shipping is free. I was having a hard time finding the silver oxide version for my AT-1 and they had them to me in a couple days.

I also own both the A-1 and the F1n (second version), and I find it hard to recommend one over the other. I love shooting the match-needle F1 for manual exposure, but I prefer the A-1 when I want appreture or shutter priority, since no accessories are needed to do so. The A-1 is also great when you feel like the "no-brainer" program mode: just point, focus, shoot. But I do have a love-affair with my F1, it's controls are intuitive, and it feels indestructable. On the negative side, you will find dozens of pricey F-1 accessories that you MUST have (most of which cost more than a clean A-1 body!)

My advice: go for the F-1, then spend the $120 later to pick up an A-1 body as your back-up. (that's what I did)

I'll have to second Mark's statements and add that I still get batteries for my A-1 at Wal-Mart (how much more universal can you get?). As for toughness, I'm sure the F-1 would fare better than the A-1 when dropped from a measured height. However, I bought my A-1 new in 1982 and it even survived a year in sub-Saharan Africa. I don't use it too much any more (now have a T-90), but the batteries have always lasted more than two years. The camera did not develop the mirror damper squeal until last year and went to the shop for its first and only CLA.

If I were you, I would go with either an F1 or a T90. The T90 is lighter than the F1, but has an incredible amount of features and an excellent metering system (built in multiple spot and partial metering). For the price that they are going for now, I wouldn't really think it would be worth it to get an A1, despite it being a good camera. The T90 takes all the same lenses and has much more sophisticated features. The F1 is, however, a totally different beast, as was indicated above. One thing that has not been mentioned before is if the electronics on the A1 or T90 fail, you are pretty much out of luck. If you can find someone to repair their electronic minutae I am sure it will cost you a ton of money. On the other hand, the F1 is pretty straightforward in all aspects of design and is easily repaired. I was given one by my father who got it from B&H. They charged him an arm and a leg for it, as it appeared to be in perfect condition. On closer inspection, it was evident that it had been dropped squarely on its edge, denting the metal frame and preventing film counter from turning. I had a local guy hammer out the dents and it works perfectly. The thing truly is a tank -- it received a pretty severe knock, and everything was still in perfect order except for the dent. So, my verdict: if you want durability and peace of mind, go for the F1, if you want more features, bag the A1 and go for the T90, the difference in price is definitely worth it.

Of course, the T90 is worthless if you DON'T want a motor drive.

Forget the A1 unless you get it cheap. If you don't need a motor: F1New, if you need a motor or automatic: T90. The auto on F1 is not wearth much, as it has no meter lock - the only advantege of the A1.

 

To the right in the viewfinders of both F1, T90 and EOS1, you will see the changing of the light and contast That you will miss, if you start using it, and change to a camera that has no such thing.

 

I did find the manual use of A1 cumbersome, and the program mode was not an option, the meterlock had a place where it would not be used.

 

Øyvind:D

The point with the A-1 is that you CAN get it quite cheap. A pristine one with a 50mm f1.4 lens should be under $200, and a VG+ user with an f1.8 lens can be gotten for barely over $100. There are not too many sophisticated automated cameras of this quality that can be gotten for barely over $100 (the Olympus OM-2 or Minolta X-700 come to mind as the others).

I've just got an F-1. It is the New (latest) F-1.

 

Compared with the A-1, I like the simple and very quick match needle meetering, the A-1 is a pig to use in full manual mode! But then, the F-1 is a bit of a pig with the AE head on and aperture priority auto. (I've not tried the shutter priority because I have no desire for a drive or winder for this camera but I imagine it is OK)

 

This has I know already been covered but the main advantage of the F-1 is quality.

 

Just hold one, you will know immediately what I mean.

 

The T-90 is also a great camera, the auto and program modes are much better and easier to use than the A-1 or F-1. For most photography, the T-90 is just the best camera ever. Check out those metering options!

 

For full manual control though and it's workman-like construction the F-1 takes some beating. I would trust it to work where I would be concerned for the life of my T90!

 

All of which rather leaves the A-1 as a poor relation to two exceptional cameras. Don't mis-understand me, the A-1 is a good cheap camera but the T90 and F-1 are GREAT cheap camera's.

 

Joe

Sorry, any camera that uses obsolete lenses and has some troblesome items (such as LCD displays) for which parts are unavailable, yet sells for $300 or so, is NOT a CHEAP camera, in any sense of the word. Rather, at this point, a T-90 is an outstanding, but EXPENSIVE camera, with some real risk of near term obsolescence if the LCD goes. If you could get one for under $200, it would be a cheap camera, however it would still be MASSIVE. I consider an A-1 body for WELL under 1/2 the cost of a T-90, and half the weight, with most of the same features, to be far and away the best value. And, BTW, I agree that one doesn't buy an A-1 to do metered manual. One buys it to use in one of the 3 automated exposure modes. For me, my preferred mode of operation is in Aperture priority, and when I want to adjust exposure, I use the compensation dial. For THIS mode of operation, The A-1 is a wonderful camera, and, as good or better than anything else in the Canon line.

 

When I shoot with metered manual, I want a SIMPLE, small and light camera, which neither the T-90 nor the F-1n can claim to be. As such, within the Canon FD system, I'd use an AT-1 for that.

 

For me, the SINGLE MOST important attribute of ANY 35mm camera I use for general purpose work is light weight, yet solid construction, and I DON'T care for a motor drive 99% of the time. As such, I have no personal use for any Canon 35mm cameras EXCEPT for the A-series cameras. I sold my F-1n because I didn't care to lug it around, and I never even would consider a T-90, as it is just way too big and heavy. If I'm going to carry around that heavy a beast, I'll use my Pentax 67 and get a giant negative in the process.