Adventures with Canon FL gear - Part 2

[capitalq]

<p>This continues my previous post where I described how the Canon FX introduced the FL mount in 1964 (the year the Beatles landed in America!). </p>

<p>The very next year, Canon released a camera which was highly unusual in its design although outwardly it seemed very similar to its siblings: the Canon Pellix. This was Canon's first attempt at TTL metering -- then all the rage as the latest and greatest technological refinement of this era. Canon's TTL system was a stop-down system similar in operation to the Spotmatic. Canon's system was certainly inferior to the remarkable Topcon RE Super which offered wide-open TTL metering back in 1963 (and has the metering circuitry etched in the pentaprism mirror), or the very cool Miranda Sensorex from 1966 which allows for metering even with the removal of the prism head (a feat that I don't think was ever duplicated by another manufacturer).</p>

<p>But while the metering technology was nothing to marvel at, the Pellix was the first mass-produced SLR that featured a pellicle mirror -- an ultra-thin semi-transparent film only 20/1000 mm thick in place of a fixed mirror. This eponymous mirror allows about two-thirds of the incoming light to hit the film, while the rest is reflected to the viewfinder.</p>

<p>The benefits of this system are:<br>

(a) simpler construction;<br>

(b) less noisy operation; <br>

© no viewfinder blackout during exposure; and<br>

(d) vibration-free operation.</p>

<p>But the major issues are:<br>

(1) dimness of light (about one half stop lost in the exposure through the semitransparent mirror, and about one and three-fourth stop dimmer in the viewfinder compared to using a fully reflecting mirror), and<br>

(2) over time the pellicle mirror surfaces becomes scratched and therefore degrades the projected image that forms the image on the film. Wiping down the pellicle surface with a damp cloth can do more harm than good....<br>

To solve the first problem, Canon made two fast lenses, the FL 50mm 1:1.4 and the FL 58mm 1:1.2, in order to compensate for the light loss. Canon also provided the Pellix with a metal shutter curtain and a switch to black out the viewfinder (features not duplicated amongst its siblings until the F-1) to prevent stray light from entering. Alas, there was no solution to the second problem other than replacement of a very expensive (and increasingly rare) part...</p>

<p> </p><div></div>

[capitalq]

<p>As you will note from the above image, at first glance the Pellix has much the same profile as the FX or even the FTb. But upon closer inspection, you will note some features which were never seen in other Canon SLR bodies (or were first introduced with this flagship model). First off, note the engraved name on the front of the prism. I don't believe any other Canon SLR featured a model name like this. To the uninitiated, you might think this was the Canon model by Pellix... </p><div></div>

[User_502260]

<p>The Canon F-1 and F-1n have meters which operate without a finder being attached. In the case of the Speed Finder, the meter scale is visible in the finder even if the magnification is lowered. The meter still works with the Waist Level finder but its view is blocked by the edges of the finder. The Miranda Autosensorex EE and EE2 cameras will also meter with their finders removed. The information on the Pellix having metal shutter curtains reminds me of the shutter modifications made by Cosina when it introduced the Bessa L. </p>

[john_shriver]

<p>The Topcon RE Super (Beseler Topcon Super D in US) could definitely meter with the prism removed, or using any of the alternatives to the prism.<br>

It's the Nikon F and F2 that became meterless when you removed the Photomic prism.<br>

The Nikon F3 can meter with the prism removed, it uses a semi-silvered mirror. So can the Pentax LX, using the same semi-silvered mirror trick. (In both, a small mirror behind the semi-silvered spot reflects the light to a silicon photo-diode.)</p>

 

[capitalq]

<p>Thanks, Jeff & John. I stand corrected.</p><div></div>

[capitalq]

<p>The stop-down meter circuit is activated by this very cool ergonomic switch which also doubles as the self timer. This handsome switch debuted with the Pellix and became a mainstay until the FTbN and F-1 came out with more traditional looking switches. </p>

<div></div>

[capitalq]

<p>On the picture above, you see another feature which was unique to the Pellix - the knurled switch which doubled to check the battery as well as close the viewfinder. </p><div></div>

[capitalq]

<p>The shot above shows the sideways battery compartment. I always liked the placement of this on older Canons. The Pellix version allows you to use a coin to turn it open and closed. Contrast this with the horrible placement of the battery and switch on the SRT 101 or the puny battery cover on the Spotmatic which is near impossible to remove without scratching the camera.</p><div></div>

[capitalq]

<p>As seen from the shot above and below, the right side controls of the Pellix weren't that much different from the Canon FX and subsequent models. The only notable change is the silver shutter speed selector which debuted on the Pellix and not seen again on any other subsequent model. Perhaps befitting a flagship model... </p><div></div>

[User_502260]

<p>Pellicle mirrors never completely disappeared from cameras after the Pellix QL. Both Canon and Nikon used them in high speed motor drive SLRs. There is a limit to how fast you can open and close the shutter while the up and down movement of the mirror is part of the cycle. Canon again made use of a pellicle mirror in the EOS RT. A friend of mine has a few of them and really likes them. As higher speed film improved in quality the light loss from the pellicle mirror seemed like less of a problem. Now we have Sony DSLR cameras with pellicle mirrors. This allows them to have continuous high speed AF in live veiw or video modes. Everything old is new again!</p>

[capitalq]

<p>We now resume our previously interrupted broadcast...</p>

<p>The shot below shows the ultra-thin pellicle mirror. I opened the back of the camera and you can see the granite countertop through the mirror. You can also note the fine scratches and blemishes that are present on the surface. If this was a standard reflex mirror, it would be easy enough to clean but with a pellicle mirror one has to be extra careful... </p><div></div>

[capitalq]

<p>Frankly, as much as I like Canon cameras, the engineering innovations in the Pellix were answers in search of a problem. The lack of vibration and absence of viewfinder blackout is hardly a selling point for most everyday uses of a SLR. It may have uses in macro or high-speed photography (as was indeed the case in a pellicle version of the F-1 introduced during the Sapporo Olympics and later EOS and Nikon designs) but without the ability to attach a power-winder like the F or the RE Super, one could hardly realize this benefit in the Pellix. Also, the lack of a mirror slap may be less noisy but the camera still has the loud Canon shutter mechanism from this era. And so, while this camera certainly showed that Canon's engineers were hard at work, it is clear why this camera was not embraced by the professional market. In summary, while the Pellix may not have been a big marketing or commercial success, it kept Canon in the game as a manufacturer of innovative prosumer cameras. </p>

<p>But having said all that, let me give you my impressions of this camera in 'regular' use. It's solid and heavy. The switchgear, controls and construction are excellent. Not perhaps as refined as the Topcon RE Super or the Nikon F but certainly superior to many other makes of that era. And even though I should be able to anticipate it, the absence of mirror blackout is viscerally disconcerting every time I take a shot -- almost like using a modern digital point and shoot but without that annoying delay in firing the shutter. The viewfinder is indeed dim but the CdS meter is still accurate and the results paired with the FL glass are very satisfying (see shots below). Almost 5 decades later, this camera is still a gem.</p>

<div></div>

[capitalq]

<p>The shots here were taken with Agfa APX 400 pushed to 1600 on an overcast fall day just prior to dusk. </p><div></div>

[capitalq]

<p>A close-up using the 58mm f1.2 FL glass wide open...</p><div></div>

[capitalq]

<p>Is there some image drop-off and darkening at the edges? Maybe. But it works for me... </p><div></div>

[capitalq]

<p>Not sure what this thing was used for...Any guesses?</p><div></div>

[matthew_rusbarsky]

<p>That is a rocker-type fluting iron. It was used to press fancy collars and cuffs mid 19th century style. Your photos have a great look that compliments the classic lenses. Care to share some film/developer info?</p>

[mfophotos]

<p>I briefly owned a Pellix that I bought for $15. One thing that is apparent -- if you have dirt or spots on the pellicle mirror, then that also degrades the image. Yes, Canon had some good glass and some robust cameras, but it seems to me that their designs were all over the place, and the only innovation that they had that I liked was the QL feature. The A-1 is a nice camera, but awfully fiddly with too many controls. I never owned an F-1, but a friend has the newer version, and it's a fine camera. It just seems that until the T90, Canon lagged Nikon in many respects. The FTbQL might be their best all-around manual camera, from the standpoint of a mostly Nikon user. </p>

[capitalq]

<p>Thanks, Matthew. I used Agfa (off-brand) APX 400 film. I am able to easily and consistently push it to 1600 using d76 at 1:1 dilution. You get more grain but seeing as I mostly shoot handheld/available light, the "higher speed" gives me more range to use different aperture/shutter combinations. </p>

[capitalq]

<p>Mark: Using the phrase "from the standpoint of a mostly Nikon user" instantly disqualifies you from commenting on Canon gear. Seriously, I tend to agree with you that Canon was mostly playing catch-up to Nikon during the 60s and up to 1976 when they introduced the AE-1. While I often gripe about the end of the Golden Era with the introduction of the CPU and plasticized bodies, I cannot dispute that with the AE-1, Canon's engineers were successful in putting together various innovations which caused Nikon (and others) to play catch-up for the first time -- both commercially and technologically. Case in point, the Nikon EM from 1979 (the lady's Nikon) which looks and feels inferior to the AE-1. But more importantly, I think we have to recognize that Nikon was also fairly conservative in its designs and not the most innovative manufacturer from that era. Topcon and Miranda had equivalent or superior products in the early 60s. Minolta and Pentax had better metering systems. The Konica Autoreflex series featured shutter-priority automation in 1966! And the Olympus OM-1 changed the size equation forever....I could go on but you get the picture. No, Nikon's forte was not in innovation but in creating quality equipment, excellent marketing, and being nimble enough to change with the times.</p>

[mark_pierlot]

<p>I have a friend who's been shooting many times longer than I have, uses slide film exclusively, and has never shot digitally. He started with the Nikon F system, abandoning it for Canon EOS in the 90's. A few years ago he adopted the Canon FD system, and he has more recently acquired a modest Nikon F kit, bringing himself full circle.</p>

<p>In his estimation, the Nikon F and Canon FD systems are equally good. His favourite manual bodies are the Nikon F2 and Canon F-1, and he considers the Nikkor and FD ranges of lenses to be not only equivalent in quality, but also complementary in use.</p>

[mfophotos]

<p>LOL, Q. You have me there. Maybe that's what so fun about these cameras - the variety and not all have the same feature set, controls, and ergonomics. Whereas today's DSLRs not only look much alike, but aside from where the buttons are placed, are pretty much the same.</p>

 

[capitalq]

<p>Mark P - You clearly have a future in conflict resolution and peace negotiations. Resolving the ongoing debates between Nikonistas and Canonphiles may be easier than arriving at peace in the Middle East. I have both the F2 and the F-1. Both are superb cameras but I like the look of the plain prism Canon over the box-top Nikon. I also have high praise for Hexanon and Rokkor glass. For what its worth, I also use a Canon dSLR and my favourite lens for shooting 1080p video is a classic rabbit-eared Nikkor 35mm f2....</p>

<p>Mark O - Sadly, I agree with you. Modern cameras are truly marvels of technology...but they have lost their quirkiness, personality and souls.</p>

[marc_bergman1]

<p>Capital Q,</p>

<p>This has been a fascinating 2 part series. I got involved with the Canon FD system in 1972. The 1970's was really a golden decade for Canon. First with the F-1, then the FTb, EF, Ae-1, then the A-1.</p>

<p>The 1960's really looks like they were struggling to find their place in the market. They seemed to have the engineering expertise but couldn't find their place in the SLR market. </p>

<p>I would love to learn some background information on the development of the F-1 system. It was a bold move and really paid off. I stayed with the FD system from 1972 until 1996. Only the EOS system moved me away from it.</p>

 

[capitalq]

<p>Thanks, Marc. I agree with you that Canon got its groove on in the 70s. While they certainly had experience making quality rangefinders in the 50s, re: SLRs they were consistently behind the likes of Nikon, Asahi, Minolta and even Konica during the 60s. But as you can see, they always made quality glass. I'm not surprised you were forced to move to the EOS system. Unlike Nikon's F-mount or Minolta's SR-mount or the venerable m42 standard, Canon engineers and marketers repeatedly demonstrated that they were willing to throw their existing customers under the bus to get new customers....But hey, history has proved their strategy to be a good one: they're still around and now number one when a lot of their rivals have perished. Let's hope the EF-mount sticks around for a while...</p>