Bad luck? 2nd Canon F-1N (New) with issues.

[stephen_moon1]

<p>Hi,<br>

<br />I have been learning so much by searching through the threads here, I really appreciate all the sharing of knowledge. After years of wanting to take photos, I have finally been making some purchases to realize that goal - a couple of lenses to get me started and a Canon F-1N, New F-1. I managed to grab a few accessories from KEH, as well. I only know about them from the forums here, so thanks again.<br>

Anyway, the first F-1N I got on an auction site said that all was tested and that the shutter operated properly. When I got it, however, I found that the shutter only worked properly at the first few low speeds. All the other speeds seem to fire at the same sluggish rate, no matter how high I adjust it. I thought it was a power issue, so I bought a new battery at Radio Shack. But, it still had the same problem. The timer worked, though, so I know the electronics were at least partially working. At that point I just sent it back as I have seen that other people have had similar issues. <br>

The second one I got has the same problem! Or, am I the problem? Could it be user error? They claimed it was tested at all speeds, too. I tried to be very picky about the seller reputation and description of its testing. I don't have it loaded with film, I am just testing it as I got it. I have changed the switch from "normal" to "light", and tried a couple of other things. The timer on this one didn't work at first, it would beep but the shutter never moved. Replacing it with my battery - from last time - fixed that, but the shutter remains slow. The pin in the battery compartment has what I consider to be very good resistance, it is firm when I push it. Am I missing something here? Is there a setting I am overlooking to get this to work right? If I have this set to 1/2000th it should click extremely fast, right? <br>

This last one that I bought is in amazing shape, and the serial number indicates that it was from one of the last years that it was made. So, if it is truly just bad luck, and this one is also broken, should I keep searching for a late 30xxxx serial number F-1N in excellent condition? Or, could this be repaired at a reasonable rate? All the other ones that are in this good of shape and late serial number are considerably more expensive. I just want to find one that was taken care of and will last me for a long time. Thanks for any insight you can offer, I greatly appreciate it. </p>

<p>All the best,</p>

<p>Stephen</p>

[Keith S in Arizona USA]

<p>Too bad about the mis-described cameras. I had one really bad deal like that over twenty years of ebay purchases.<br /> Many sellers do not know about cameras at all, or about shutters and meters, whether they are close to spec or not. This is not really them trying to take advantage (usually); they just are not literate in the world of cameras.<br /> Due to old dried out lube, many cameras will NOT function in the Self-Timer mode, causing the shutter to hang up, or fire too slowly. These obviously will need a CLA (Clean, Lube, Adjust.) Often worth it for a camera you desire to keep long term and use a lot, or even pass along someday to someone else.<br /> I had a good experience buying a New F-1 off ebay some time back at auction. <strong>Keep looking.</strong> Also, ask a few questions up front of the seller before you commit. If you get vague, unsatisfactory or NO answers, . . . <strong>PASS. </strong>"Most" of the sellers I have sent inquiries to have been more than happy to answer.<br /> There are a lot of old 35mm film cameras out there and you need to weed out the potential good ones from the potential bad ones. You may not always come out a winner, but you can greatly reduce your chances of a bad deal.<br /> Many of us have had poor auction transactions; such is life.<br /> REMINDER: Take the "shutter operates properly at all speeds" and "meter works / is accurate" statements with a bit of suspicion as no one can really tell you this unless they are the original owner/user, are qualified service personnel or have the equipment for test.<br /> "Tested at all speeds" is really a vague (and unfortunate) description from an uninformed seller. Yes, it may <strong>"function,"</strong> as a seller may have noted, but <strong>not</strong> necessarily correctly, and he may not know that.<br /> The main guidance I am offering here is to get all the <strong>detailed</strong> information you can up front. For example, ask "You said in your ad that ______, and how did you verify that this is correct?" (A simple, polite and un-accusatory form of questioning is best to prevent a seller from being put off to answering.)<br /> Hope this helps in your finding a good camera !!!</p>

[stephen_moon1]

<p>Update: when I actually open the back - and keep it open - it seems to move bit faster through the finder, at 1/2000th ,then when the door is shut. At low speeds, when looking through the finder, i see it "black" for a long time - the correct time, like 1 second. Is that just how these work? Does a proper one behave this way? As in, when I look though the finder will the view seem slow when I go higher than the first few shutter settings? Sorry for my noobness! Thanks again.</p>

[stephen_moon1]

<p>When I read about those issues before purchasing my camera, maybe it caused me to misinterpret what is normal - due to my lack of experience? I just thought the view through the finder would be as fast as the shutter "blink" setting is set to. With the back off it is definitely very fast. Am I explaining this correctly/coherently? </p>

[Keith S in Arizona USA]

<p>Sounds like your mirror is properly doing its thing; your scene "blacks out" just like it is supposed to. Here is how this works for a SLR camera for those out there who are Rangefinder (or other types) camera operators and may not know:<br>

At one second, for example, the mirror has to flip up for slightly more than that to expose the film.<br>

You press the shutter, the mirror flips up, the shutter opens and the film is exposed (for 'X' amount of time, say 1 second or 2 seconds or whatever), and then the shutter closes and the mirror flips back down again.<br>

The mirror is in the camera at an angle and it used to view the scene you are looking at by reflecting the scene up into the prism where the viewfinder window is. The mirror needs to "flip up"out of the path of the lens-to-flim path for the film to be exposed. After the exposure is made, the mirror flip back down again for viewing the next shot.<br>

The faster the shutter operates, the less time the mirror is "up." In the "bulb" or "time" position, the mirror will stay "up"as long as the shutter remains open.</p>

 

[stephen_moon1]

<p>I just thought the "black out" time in the viewfinder should match the perceived speed as the shutter moves when I watch it with the back open. Is that not the case, and everything is fine? Thanks for the info, Keith.</p>

[stephen_moon1]

<p>I think I see whats going on... When looking at the mirror and firing it, the mirror has to fall back to its position. So, it may move up quickly, depending on the shutter speed setting, but it still falls back at the same rate - no matter the setting. And the mirror moving is what causes that "blackout". I was under the impression that it would appear to move the same speed, when looking through the viewfinder.</p>

[rick_janes]

<p>Stephen, that's a good question! The mirror's retraction and return times are fixed and determined by its own mechanism, they do not change with shutter speed. In simplest terms, the viewfinder blackout duration = (mirror retraction time) + (shutter cycle duration) + (mirror return time). This mirror operation takes much longer than the extremely short durations of an F-1's fastest shutter speeds, and it's why you perceive viewfinder blackout as unchanged.</p>

[stephen_moon1]

<p>Oh, ok. I had it in my head that the blackout should be equal to the shutter's speed. It makes sense now. If the first seller hadn't misrepresented the condition of the camera's optics and lenses, I would feel a little more badly than I do for returning it! So, user error it is. I appreciate the insight. I am glad to know that I have a good camera in my hands now. Thank you very much, Rick and Keith. Now it is time to download the manual for the Motor Drive and get ready to shoot some this weekend.</p>

[Keith S in Arizona USA]

<p>Oh, yeh, one thing about attaching the motor drive that some folks are not aware of. On the bottom plate of the camera beneath where the film canister sits, is a cover that has to be removed to attach the motor drive. Don't remove that cover with any film in the camera or the film will be exposed. <strong>If you are already aware of this, I apologize in advance.</strong><br /> The three covers you remove to attach the motor drive can be nested together and retained by screwing them into a threaded 'socket' on the motor drive section of it. A very nifty storage idea the engineers created!<br /> Should you find you need service at some point on this very fine camera, three recommended personnel are: Kurt's Camera in San Diego, California, Ken Oikawa in Sun City, California, and Steve Sweringen in Sparks, Nevada. They are all experts on the F-1N. (Steve can probably service these in his sleep.)</p>

<p>Rick -- thank you for correcting my misinformation !!! :-)</p>

[PapaTango]

<p>Rick J. has pretty well sized up how the optical path works. The mirror of course will stay up longer with exposures less than say, 1/60th of a second. Higher than this it is limited by the time taken to travel and the shutter mechanism to complete. The mirror will take just as long at 1/250 as it does at 1/1000 of a second. You can get a better idea of shutter timing by opening the back and watching what happens when the curtains travel--the view directly from the film plane through the lens.</p>

<p>The F-1 is indeed a worthy beast, and a marvelous range of accessories is available. One of the biggest issues for cameras of this age is the condition of the light seals. Jon Goodman was the 'king' of seal kits--I have dropped an email off to him to see if he is still selling.</p>

[PapaTango]

<p>I just got an email back from Jon. He still carries and sells the common camera seals--you can reach him via email JGood21967 [at] aol.com</p>

<p> </p>

[stephen_moon1]

<p>Thanks for the tip! How do I tell if this camera needs new seals?</p>

[Keith S in Arizona USA]

<p>There are several easy things you can do to evaluate the seals' conditions.</p>

<p>First, upon opening the rear cover, examine the edges of the cover where the edges fit into the channels (where you see the foam strips residing.) If you find any loose, crumbly black debris, this is the foam deteriorating. This indicates replacement of the dust seals is needed right now. Some debris may be found stuck to the door edges if the deterioration has been ongoing.</p>

<p>You do not want this evil garbage migrating into the shutter or other mechanics of the camera, so immediate attention is advised.</p>

<p>In the front of the camera, also check at the top of the mirror box where the gray-looking glass focus screen resides. You are checking the foam strip at the front of the focusing screen for the same deterioration. If crumbly / sticky, do not operate the shutter until that mirror cushion foam strip is replaced. (Gooey material transferred from the foam and mirror edge can get "bounced" onto the focusing screen and it can sometimes be a nightmare for a tech to clean. In bad cases it cannot be totally removed. At least I have been told that by a Canon tech.)</p>

<p>If the foam seals and the mirror cushion "seem" to be OK, the foam still needs MORE evaluation. Use a toothpick, edge of a thin plastic card, or other similar NON-DAMAGING device to carefully poke at the rear door dust seals and mirror cushion. Nice, non-deteriorated foam will NOT cause the toothpick or card to "stick." If you encounter "stickiness," the seals are in the process of deteriorating and need replacement.</p>

<p>There are "two types" ("hee" I say) of foam seals in these cameras. One is foam seals that <strong>ARE</strong> failing due to age. The other is foam seals that <strong>WILL</strong> fail due to age, just not right now.</p>

<p>'Someone' on occasion has replaced these seals with some sort of woven rope seals. I have no other knowledge of this type of seal.</p>

<p>If you are even the slightest bit handy, Jon Goodman's seal kits are a breeze to install. His instructions are clear, concise, and extremely easy to follow. I used lighter fluid to clean the old material from the channels. It leaves NO residue, will not damage the paint, evaporates quickly, and is cheap and easy to find at the grocery or hardware store. His kits even supply a bamboo stick designed specifically to clean out the channels on the camera. USE GOOD VENTILATION when you use any solvents and wear Nitrile gloves. Follow his directions explicitly and all will be fine.</p>

<p>!!! Be extremely careful to not touch or damage the shutter when you are working on the camera !!!</p>

<p>If you choose to have a camera repair shop do this, it should not be costly at all (cost may vary by shop) because it is a very easy job for them. You may need to supply the seals for some shops, however, if they do not have any seal kits. Jon Goodman is reportedly a 'major' supplier for these kits.</p>

<p>If you got lucky, your camera may have had this done in the not too distant past.</p>

[stephen_moon1]

<p>All the seals look perfect to me. None of the issues you mentioned are present. Thanks for all the info!</p>

[PapaTango]

<p>Keith, that was a stellar response. I especially liked the "there are two types of foam seal" part. That pretty well sums it up. I bought a pair of Canon A-1's about 15 years ago--and they manifested all of the gooey, crumbly crap one could find. And I did get a glob on the front silvered mirror--that spot was never right again and I have a LOT of experience with cleaning specialized optical systems.</p>

<p>As a matter of course anytime a camera comes into my possession that is older than 30 years, it gets new seals and a CLA. This has included 35's and all of my Mamiya RB67 bodies and film backs. I have done this even when the seal is still seen as serviceable for a few more years. I learned the hard way with many things that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure...</p>

[Keith S in Arizona USA]

<p>Seems to me I have heard that focusing screens may be either ground glass or laser-etched in some manner to create the focus surface. I have always wondered if a contaminated mirror or focus screen could be removed and cleaned of sticky foam adhesive residue by shooting steam on it.</p>

<p>Any camera techs out there tried this, or is it once a mirror / focus screen is badly contaminated, it is all over for that item?</p>

<p>If I had any junkers with gooped up screens or mirrors I would certainly give it a try just as an experiment. But . . . I don't.</p>

<p>Patrick, you and I are on the same page as per your second paragraph. :-)</p>

[tony_webster2]

<p>I can tell you I own 3 F1s,. I bought one of them from KEH which was in LN- condition and it functions perfectly.. The next one I bought off of B&H which actually just had a CLA done on it and my other one was my dad's that he used once and put in a box. </p>

<p>For the latter one I had to have some work done to it. The meter was fried because he left a battery in it and I bought a parts camera and had it transplanted. The other thing was when I would fire it at high speed it would lock up on occasion. Found out that it was a misaligned mirror and had to have some adjustments done to it. I opted for a full CLA. Don't know if any of you know how much of a bitch it is to do a CLA on those cameras but it's actually very difficult. However it was worth the time and money to get it done here. </p>

<p>I always recommend to a new F1 owner to get the motordrive FN. It makes life easier and although it can get heavy with all of the AA batteries in there the camera works best with one of these<br>

In response to Keith. I cleaned a focusing screen with steam. The parts camera I had which I had the meter taken out of the focusing screen had a lot of crap on it so I cleaned it using steam and it loosened everything up then I used a microfiber lens cleaning cloth and BAM, I have an extra focusing screen now.<br>

Believe it or not I am an avid FD collector and hobbyist. I own over 50 lenses and about 15 bodies and I am launching my website and youtube channel where I will be reviewing gear and my site will have all my work on it. Believe it or not, I actually do paid work with this stuff.</p>

 

[richard_cook2]

Have you put a film through the camera yet?

[stephen_moon1]

<p>I will be tomorrow! I am excited. I also picked up a Canon VI-T that I got at a local resale shop, for only $3! It came with a lens, the matching meter, and leather case. I will report back. Thanks for all the great info and advice, it is greatly appreciated.</p>

[jim_bielecki1]

<blockquote>

<p>I also picked up a Canon VI-T that I got at a local resale shop, for only $3!</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>A Canon VI-T for $3.00! The deal of 2016 (at least so far). What lens did it come with?</p>

[stephen_moon1]

<p>Canon 50mm 1.8</p>

[mwmcbroom]

<p>A while back, I had an FTb with a badly deteriorated mirror foam "bumper." It was sticky/gooey and somebody had managed to smear some of it onto much of the focusing screen. As you may know, the screen in the FTb is not interchangeable, so one would have to partially dismantle the camera to remove the screen so that it could be cleaned the way removable screens are. Well, not feeling like tearing into that old FTb, I just got out a few cotton swabs and some acetone. The acetone dissolved the goo completely and the swabs were able to remove it entirely from the screen. When I was finished, the screen was in pristine condition again. It was actually an easy job, accomplished with simple tools.</p>

[rick_janes]

<p>VI-T, $3. Crazy!</p>