Canon FTbn or EF???

<p>I'm on a quest to collect and build a stable of Cannon FD cameras and lenses. I just love grabbing one on any given day and experiencing it. And for pennies on the dollar from what they originally cost, its a reasonably painless passion. I have purchased and experienced about a dozen from the QL17 to the T90. Heck, I even picked put a fabulous, but dirt cheap, EOS Elan 7N that feels and shoots super nice in my hands and uses my DSLR lenses. My two favorites so far are the FTbn Black and the F1N. I tend to prefer the bulky, heavy and mechanical ones.<br>

On this forum, you all have such awesome threads on many cameras and great comparisons, but I cannot find a head to head of the FTbn and the EF. Yes I know the EF has some automation and a unique shutter, but shooting the cameras side by side, what is the experience and the opinions? I have not held or experienced an EF and wonder if I should stake $100 to give one a go. What are the opinions and comparisons?</p>

<p>Can't answer your direct question (comparison), but I can say that the EF is (1) a great looking camera, and (2) practical, because it can take modern batteries -- no need to hunt down mercury-battery equivalents.</p>

<p>Here's some info on the EF:</p>

<p>http://basepath.com/ClassicCameras/grid.php?id=18776955&key=gpnkXf</p>

<p >I’ve owned both cameras and basically comes down to whether you want an automatic camera or a manual camera. The FTb doesn’t do automation and the EF does manual rather poorly. There are operational and ergonomic differences between the two cameras, but, to me, it comes down to the automatic vs. manual argument. I’m sure others will chime in with their thoughts.</p>

<p>I've had two, and I find the EF does manual OK. It's a good camera. </p>

<p>(i) As Marc noted, it can use non-mercury 625 cells (although I find I have to adjust the ISO on mine to get the meter calibrated right).</p>

<p>(ii) It also has mirror lock and uses a silicon blue photocell in its meter, both of which can be useful features.</p>

<p>Can't comment on the FTb-- never had one.</p>

 

<p>I bought a new FTBn and a new EF in 1974. I sold the FTBn a few years later.<br>

I still have the EF. I found it to have the most accurate light meter of any camera I used in that era, when I shot mostly Kopdachrome 25. It still works well and because it uses bridge circuitry, it digests inexpensive alkaline cells.</p>

<p>I have and have used both cameras; in fact, the Canon EF was my very first SLR. Both the EF and the FTbn are rugged and eminently usable. The EF has a few distinct advantages, however.</p>

<p>- An unparalleled metering system. The shutter-speed dial goes all the way down to <em>thirty seconds</em>. I can think of no other camera with such a feature.</p>

<p>- Speaking of which, the shutter-speed dial hangs over the front of the camera (sort of like the Leica M5) which offers a distinct ergonomic advantage; you can spin the dial with your index finger without removing the camera from your eye.</p>

<p>- And speaking of <em>that</em> — and I distinctly remember teenage me choosing the EF over many other cameras for exactly this reason — both shutter speed and aperture are displayed in the viewfinder.</p>

<p>- Finally: automatic is nice.</p>

<p>I had an FTbN for thirty years and an EF for three. The EF is distinctly the more solidly built camera. For the user today, its bridge circuit must be the deciding factor. The shutter speed dial is a mixed blessing. Once, in the dark, I managed to move it one notch faster than sync speed and so ruined a series of flash exposures.</p>

<p>Well, you all have intrigued me enough, along with a video on Youtube by GasStation, and will purchase. I actually think the wife will love this camera, with its semi-auto mode. I gotta say though....I really, really love the FTBn's...... Yep, I am all over the old-school, retro thing.</p>

<p>I have a half dozen FTb/FTbn (including the my first serious camera, my 1973 FTb) and 2 EFs.<br>

Both are a joy to use, but as stated previously, the EF batteries and meter are top notch. The ergonomics are a cut above, but the film advance is the smoothest I've ever used.<br>

<br />The EF is definitely worth it fr anyone who wants to collect (and use) the F series Canons.</p>

<p>Ed</p>

<p>One thing that hasn’t been mentioned is the different metering patterns between the two cameras. The EF uses center-weighted metering, like a Nikon, which the FTb uses selective-area metering, like the Canon F-1. </p>

<p>I bought an EF back in 1974 when the camera first came out. No doubt it’s an outstanding camera, but, being a control freak, I tired of automation and grew to dislike center-weighted metering. So, in 1977 or so, I sold the camera and bought an F-1. I still have the F-1.</p>

<p>They are different cameras. FTb is manual and EF is shutter priority. Both have mechanical shutters and can be used without batteries. Neither can take a motor. Both are rugged. But are fun to use. Got both. They are cheap.</p>

 

<p>Problem with EF is, that there are not many well-working items on the market anymore. Although having a mechanical shutter, there are some electronics in that camera which might just have gone down the drain over the last 45 or so years. I had to look real hard some years ago to find an EF that was still working properly. Being all mechanic the FTb might therefore be the better choice, as you won't find spare parts for the EF any longer (I tried a well-known repair shop and was told so).</p>

<p>I often say that the FTb was my first real camera (I owned an AE-1 and A-1 prior to my first FTb). I bought my first one back in 1984. To me, it is just a great, solid workhorse. I like the mirror lock up and the QL feature and the match-needle metering, but what I've always liked best about the FTb is its selective area metering pattern. It is perfect for shooting slides when encountering unusually lit scenes. When I discovered the Original F-1 used the same metering pattern, I visited a local camera show and bought one. Then I bought another one about a year later, but I still kept the FTb as a backup.</p>

<p>I owned an EF briefly years ago -- I actually bought it to sell it -- and I owned it long enough to familiarize myself with its features. I've always kinda wanted another and finally bought one a few years ago. It was damaged in a mishap, where a shelf of photo gear collapsed, so I replaced it last year. In fact, I ended up replacing it a couple of times, such that I own three now, including the dead one. I kinda got over shutter-priority AE after owning the AE-1 and A-1, so I don't use it much in that mode. Mostly I shoot it in manual, but because the aperture ring is not coupled to the meter, I always have to double check the actual aperture setting. Another user here mentioned how he prefers the way the shutter speed dial sits slightly proud of the body, making it easier to change shutter speeds without having to lower the camera away from the eye. I also like this feature. It was retained in the AE-1. Like the AE-1 and A-1 -- and all the other A-series Canons, the EF has the centerweighted metering pattern, which I really don't care for. When I was shooting slides exclusively, with their notoriously narrow exposure latitude, I ran into too many situations where extraneous light sources would negatively affect exposure if I took the meter's word for it -- or set the camera to an auto mode. These days I shoot mostly Kodak Portra with my EF, so exposure latitude problems aren't as big of an issue .</p>

<p>I have an old friend who is a retired camera technician and I recall him telling me years ago that the Canon EF was the most difficult camera that he'd ever worked on. It had to do with its first generation PC flex circuits, which apparently have grown fragile over the subsequent decades. So, even though the EF is a robustly built camera, it can be rather delicate these days. So I would recommend you don't bump it or bang it around like you might could get away with with an FTb or F-1. Also, I think you'll find that there are very few techs who are even willing to work on the EF these days. So that's another thing to keep in mind.</p>

<p>Finally, I've committed myself to a quest much as you have, in that I've acquired the FD bodies I've liked the most -- or just been curious about -- mostly just because I like Canon FD. So in this respect, I think the EF is an essential member of any definitive FD collection. It's just a simply beautiful camera, and it does what it does with grace an aplomb. My current collection consists of an AE-1 Program (black), an AT-1, an A-1, two FTbs (one black, one chrome), three EFs, two original F-1s (F-1n's to be exact), a New F-1, a T70, and a T90. I love 'em all, and I have a decent collection of FD glass to use with 'em too.</p>

<p>I am now the proud owner of three lightly used EF's, averaging about $70 each. As noted above, I will likely keep them all, for usage and then eventually parts cameras, with the goal to keep at least one alive for years to come. Can't wait to get my hands on them.</p>

<p>Good on ya, John. Do the meters and slow shutter speeds work on all three?</p>

<p> </p>

<blockquote>

<p>One thing that hasn’t been mentioned is the different metering patterns between the two cameras. The EF uses center-weighted metering, like a Nikon</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Jim, please correct me if I'm wrong but the EF has center-weighted metering <strong>with "bottom emphasis"</strong> ala Nikon. Designed to give more metering focus to the bottom of the frame (when held horizontally) so open skies would not cause underexposure. Something to keep in mind when using the camera indoors or in a vertical position.<br>

<br>

I have both and prefer the tighter, more centrally focused metering pattern of the FTbn. As Jim says, more F-1 like. <br>

</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Jim, please correct me if I'm wrong but the EF has center-weighted metering <strong>with "bottom emphasis"</strong> ala Nikon. Designed to give more metering focus to the bottom of the frame (when held horizontally) so open skies would not cause underexposure. Something to keep in mind when using the camera indoors or in a vertical position.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>You’re quite correct. Canon even went so far as to call their version of center-weighted metering “central-emphasis.” I always viewed this as a bad case of “not invented here” syndrome. Canon couldn’t admit they liked center-weighted metering (heaven forbid they use something Nikon used) so they came up with their own slightly different version and gave it a different name. </p>

<p>No matter, as mentioned before, I learned to dislike “central-emphasis” metering so sold my EF and bought an F-1. I much prefer selective-area metering, but that’s just me.</p>

<p>Just to add a bit of clarification to this meter-weighting. Nikon's most oft-used weighting pattern on its manual focus cameras was what was called its "60-40" pattern. The Nikons that employ this pattern have a largish circle visible in the viewfinder frame. 60% of the metering occurs within this circle and 40% occurs outside of it. I shot A-series Canons for years with what I've seen referred to as its "bottom-center-weighted" pattern and later shot Nikons with the 60-40 pattern, and I have to say that I much prefer the Nikon metering method. It is tighter than Canon's and less prone to exposure errors caused by extraneous light sources peaking in at the corner of the frame. The only MF Nikon that I can think of -- with the possible exception of the FA -- was the F3, which uses an 80-20 pattern. It has been my reasoning that the reason why Nikon went with this tighter pattern on the F3 was because the F3 also has an auto-exposure mode, Aperture-Priority, and that this would help reduce exposure errors, especially when shooting with slide film. I can recall the first time I decided to try an F3 set to Aperture-Priority with it loaded with slide film. All the slides came back correctly exposed, even though some had been shot in situations where a looser pattern might have resulted in under exposure. Well, after that, I found myself using my F3 in AP more and more often, and always got back well-exposed slides.</p>

<p>Having written all that, though, of all the cameras I've used over the years, I still prefer the 12% partial area metering pattern found in the FTb and original F-1 to all others. I quite like the knife-edged cut-off that happens outside the perimeter of that central rectangle.</p>

<p>The EF was notorious for using up batteries if you left it on. </p>

<p>Get the FTb. As an owner of the EF, it's beautiful and everything, but the partial metering of the FTb puts you "in control", also it is much better for manual exposure control. But the top reason is that the EF, inside, is one of the MOST difficult cameras to repair, some noted repairmen on the internet have said they refuse to service it. While the FTb is straightforward to service.<br>

I've seen the EF repair manual and indeed it is very very complex. </p>

 

<p>Update to my previous post. </p>

<p>Last week i worked on troubleshooting my own Canon EF. It is indeed more difficult to service than other SLR cameras but not impossible at all. As for the flex circuit on it, i thought it was going to be a problem but the service manual shows you don't need to remove the flex circuit to do repairs on it since the pentaprism can be removed together with the flex circuit as a block, so it stays untouched.</p>

<p>The difficult part on the EF is perhaps that it has a rather elaborate cord (string) system of pulleys and planetary gears for moving the galvanometer on par with the shutter speed selected, but once you sit and examine the mechanism work it makes perfect sense; it is not esoteric. Then it also has OTHER string and pulley, which is for transferring the selected shutter speed to the actual Copal shutter control mechanism, which is located in front of the camera. In this way, the shutter dial can be on top of the camera (the Nikkormats use the same shutter and the shutter dial is around the lens mount to avoid this problem.)<br>

<br />Only delicate point on the EF is the IC for amplifiing the photometer, it's a Toshiba IC (perhaps you can still buy it online) and it is extremely sensitive to static charges (as many IC are), so proceed with caution by discharging your hands and body from any static charge. Or do it in an humid place.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>To me the EF is a lot more attractive than the Ftb/n. The EF has the unique simple look with the shutter release on the speed dial (now I know why I like the Lumix L1!). It was the EF that made me interested in Canon. The EF was the first camera with Auto Exposure that I got. I always use a camera in manual mode but I love the S mode of the EF. I found out that those Canon cameras had AEL(ock) and I used the S mode only for that. The aperture that the camera chose was never too much different from the aperture that I wanted, so I set the shutter speed by the speed dial, then point the camera to lighter or darker part of the scene until it got the aperture I want. Then press the shutter release lightly halfway to keep that aperture, reframe, manually focus and shoot. I did all that without removing my eye from the viewfinder. It was a lazy and very fast way to set the aperture. When I don't need that feature, I remove the battery and use it manually.</p>