The Canon A1 and a Dilemma

<p >I bought the A1 from a Cash Converter stores, mainly because it had a 50mm f1.4 lens. I was a little nervous, having had a couple of these before with different problems, but with a fresh battery the camera seemed to be working OK, without the dreaded squeal. So I did the light seals and mirror bumper, and loaded it with a 200ISO 24 shot Agfa print film.</p><div></div>

<p >When I started to actually use it on a sunny but very cold day, I realised something was amiss. The camera was very slow to operate and it seemed the mirror was taking take forever to flip up. I expected the shots to be ruined but no, the exposures seemed fine.</p><div></div>

 

<p >The shots are mainly from around New Walk, Leicester, an attractive 19^th Century walkway which runs over a mile from the City Centre to Victoria Park.</p><div></div>

<p >I have to say that apart from the mirror issue, I don't particularly love this camera. The controls seem rather complex and fiddly, with a number of little buttons whose functions I couldn't remember. I much prefer the simpler classic layout of the contemporary Minolta XD7, although this lacks a programme mode. I recall that these, along with the Pentax Super A were lauded as the first multi mode cameras, with both aperture and shutter priority modes as well as manual.</p><div></div>

<p >I tried another new battery when I got it home, but it still misbehaves. I notice the viewfinder display goes out whilst the mirror is struggling to flip up – could this suggest an power problem? As I say, there's no sign of the Canon Squeal. I might have to try and lubricate it. There are a number of videos on YouTube showing how to insert a syringe from the bottom and add a drop of oil to the mechanism. I don't know.</p><div></div>

<p >At least the lens is perfect. The 700 pixel images can only suggest how sharp the results are. All were done at F8.</p><div></div>

<p>I bought an XD7 body (for twelve pounds) at the same as the A1 which was £35 with the lens. The XD7 (XD11 in America) seems to be working perfectly and I'll try to do a post on it at some point.</p><div></div>

<p>Another University building. Leicester University is credited with the invention of DNA fingerprinting by Sir Alec Jeffreys, and recently with the discovery of the remains of King Richard the Third in the City.</p><div></div>

<p>Last one - some shops in Clarendon Park Road. Opinions about the problem with the camera would be appreciated, and thanks for looking.</p><div></div>

<p>I was given a canon A-1. I have not used it. I read the reports and the manual but hesitate.<br>

I also have a T50 which will take the same lenses.<br>

it seems to me coming from an era of both manual and match-pointer cameras. that TOO much automation makes it harder ratjher than easier to take photos. I was satisfied with my first canon<br />an AE-1. Not too dauntting. I know the A-1 is a great camera.</p>

 

<p>If you have replaced the foam seal then it seems likely that the mirror is struggling due to lack of lubrication, as you have already surmised. You did well to pick it up for £35 with an f1.4 prime, even though it looks distinctly pre-loved!</p>

<p>I bought one of these brand new in 1984 (late-model) and have always looked after it. Used it regularly for years, until I wore both my third-party zoom lenses out! Then I shifted to Nikon (a move planned as soon as Canon locked out FD mount users with EOS) and now shoot mainly digital, but the A-1 still has the odd outing. Checked mine a couple of days ago - the battery is starting to get a bit low, but otherwise everything seems fine. Still enjoy shooting Ilford film with it - even the humble 50mm 1.8 has a certain "look" to it, which digital can't quite capture.</p>

<p>It's such a beautiful camera in the old style, though.</p>

<p>Nice work with it, despite all the troubles. Interesting engineering building, too.</p>

<p>John, your description of how the camera handles mirrors my experiences. Beautiful camera, but too complicated for it's own good. I would suggest an AE-1 Program if you want a modern camera. The FD glass is very, very good. If you like the 50, try one of the FD 85 1.8 lenses. Excellent portrait lens, and rel sharp at f4. Even f2.8 is pretty sharp w/ excellent bokeh, but man, that f1.8 setting is MADE for head shots. FL lenses can be used on them, but they're somewhat fiddley to use, what w/ Canon's Rube Goldberg DOF stop down "feature" and the way you have to manually meter. The other choice, and I have one w/ a bad meter that I still use a lot because I like the camera so much, is an inexpensive FT QL. Build quality is light years better than the A series cameras.</p>

<p>Thanks for the comments, Walter, yes, too much automation. I did a post on my Minolta XE1 a while back in which I suggested it had just enough automation to make picture taking a pleasure without getting in the way.</p>

<p>Peter, the camera is actually in pretty good shape apart from a little paint rubbed off near the strap lugs by, I guess, one of those wide straps with the horrible dog links.</p>

<p>JDM your comment has made me feel I've been a little unfair on the A1, I'm sure, if it was my only camera, I would have quickly got the hang of the various bits and bobs, and lets face it, virtually any modern digital camera is enormously more complex than the poor old A1. By the way the Leicester University Engineering Building is quite famous I believe, and has won a number of architectural awards.</p>

<p>Steve, actually I've got an AT1 which would perhaps be a better choice for me, and I also have an FTQL, which came with an f1.2 FL lens, which I did a post on a few months ago.</p>

<p>I confess there are other film cameras that I will use more in the future than my A-1. If I can get my T-90 shutter working again, for example.</p>

<p>I got my A-1 similarly to yours - mine was from a thrift-shop auction site and sold as "for parts" (report at http://www.photo.net/modern-film-cameras-forum/00b82L ). </p>

<p>I'm an A-1 nonlover too, but it does rank in the upper class of cameras I have used over the years. Mine was a gift and was CLA'd beforehand. It operates flawlessly for me but yes, it's a quirky little beast. I think the sad fact is, all of the electronic dependent cameras are doomed to unrepairable failure. </p>

<p>John: your photos are lovely. Great posting. I thank you also for posting your experience with your A-1. Good luck. I'll be interested in what the outcome of your camera issue might be. Please keep us posted. I also smile a bit whenever I read the impressions the A-1 has made on other users... "quirky" and "too much electronics". Other than my first 35mm SLR, one very obscure Hanimex Praktica Nova, complete with a 40mm lens f/2.8, the Canon A-1 was the camera I cut my photographic eye teeth on, brought new in May of 79 with the 50mm 1.4 breech mount prime. I took to the electronics of the A-1 like the proverbial duck to water. It was a good camera for someone like me. The electronic read out, the TV and the AV mode all helped my learning curve. In my mind match needle cameras and automatic transmissions in cars were alot alike. Too much work. In 1987 I went to a workshop in the Cascades in Oregon in 1989. The electronics of the A-1 proved to be their Achilles Heal however when they got damp or wet as they did during the trip. Last year I found two affordable A-1s at a flea market / electronic swap meet, and on auction, and this duck is happy to be in familiar water again.</p>

<p>Yeah Patrick, except it seems that dried out lubrication is the most common problem with the A series. Robb thanks for the comments. I'm sure I would have taken this camera to heart if I had got one during the 1980's. As it happens I was given a Minolta XD11, and went down that road towards Maxxum / Dynax and eventually Sony. I'll have a shot at doing the lubrication fix and report what happens.</p><div></div>

<p>oh, thank you John, again, and thank you for the additional photo. I'll have to tell my "un-informed" relatives this monument was named for the ancestral "Roberts" in our family history who have done well in life (ha!).</p>

<p>John, While not labeled as such, the XD-7 actually does have a "sort of" program mode. In Shutter priority mode, when light conditions cause maximum aperture, the camera will adjust the shutter off the shutter speed you've set to produce a correctly exposed frame. Example, if you prefer 1/125 second, and select that. The lens is set at its largest aperture (smallest number). If the light conditions can't make a good exposure at the 1/125 second, the camera will adjust to a slower speed in order to force the exposure to be correct. They call it Shutter Speed Compensation.</p>

<p>Well I took the base off the A1 and managed to introduce a couple of drops of very light sewing machine oil into the area shown in a number of YouTube videos. I just used a piece of wire and ran a couple of drops of oil down it.I also lubricated the various gears, cams and linkages thus exposed.<br>

It seems to be working OK now although this is in a warm house, I suspect the very cold weather was making things worse.<br>

Robb, Robert Hall was a famous Baptist preacher from around 1800. He's commemorated in the statue and in a large red brick church in Narborough Road, Leicester. Ken, actually I was aware the XD7 does this override of the set shutter speed to give correct exposure if it's out of limits. I think its referred to in the manual as the "second check". Minolta were a brilliant company.</p>

<p>John, I always look forward to your posts and enjoy your fine photographs. As usual, these did not disappoint. Thanks for the interesting views. Glad to hear the A-1 seems to be behaving. Is the battery-door latch intact on yours? I've seen many where the fiddly little catch is broken, not that that causes more than infrequent mild inconvenience.<br>

I got an A-1, along with the same new FD 50/1.4 (and a mess of other FD equipment, but not a spiffy 1980 Olympic lens cap) virtually for free from an old-timey camera store closing for good a couple of years ago. I was really looking forward to using it and liked its trim good (to me) looks, but somehow I never felt comfortable with it operationally. Weirdly enough, the T-90 which I consider a homely lump, I find very pleasant to use.<br>

<br />Robert Hall was the name of a clothing retailer in the US when I was growing up. Now defunct, and apparently had nothing to do with the man on the plinth. Haven't thought of Robert Hall in years....</p>

<p>Michael. thanks for the comments, yes the battery door is broken but what the heck. I agree about the T90, it's a great lump of camera. I had one given to me a while back with a stuck shutter, and managed to get it working by banging it on the floor.</p><div></div>

<p>John: thank you for the historical information. If I can't do the walk with you, at least I'm living through your camera in a vicarious way. Do you use AGFA film alot ? We had slide film here in the US many years ago, it was a fine product.</p>

<p>Yeah - Robert Hall advertised "low overhead" - but I think it only meant that they had low ceilings.</p>

<p>Is the British Robert Hall any relation to Albert Hall?</p>