AV-1 For Landscapes

[danac]

Results of the practice roll in the FTb were interesting. I now have examples of how shadows can acquire more detail (higher Zones) by giving more exposure. I have long known about this phenomenon but had never attempted it in practice. That is because all of my previous film cameras had center-weighted averaging meters. In the new roll, one f stop was usually enough to give better results by comparison with the control image (where no meter or composition adjustments were made). Metering on my hand produced excellent results. I had serious doubts about that technique but you can't argue with success. Taking a reading from the small meter rectangle at areas where I wanted the most detail produced nice images. No surprise there.

 

Now I will expose another roll or two with the FTb as I would normally spend a day of camera work (without the control image). My confidence in the FTb is still quite shaky. At this point I would still much prefer the A series meters for important landscapes. The FTb meter is just plain fussy, time consuming and confusing. I love the challenge but wonder if all the extra bother is really worth it. Maybe it's just too early to tell.

Edited February 13, 2022 by danac

[jim_bielecki1]

It's just a matter of you learning how the 12% rectangle metering works. I can't imagine taking any sort of scenic or landscape using a center-weighting or averaging meter, but I've been using 12% rectangle metering since I bought my FTb back in 1971. You're right that it is fussy, but you control everything, where you put the rectangle determines what will be metered. Makes you think! 12% metering may not be for you, but I'm glad you're giving it a chance.

[steven_endo]

I agree with the others who have said that once you get used to the 12% metering pattern, it becomes very easy to meter the areas you want to highlight. I might even go one step further and say then when you really get used to the 12% meter, averaging meters become the PITA. Since you've found that metering off your palm works, I would stick with that for "averaging" metering. When I am outdoors and I want to take a scenic photo, I always use the metering off my palm "trick" as long as I can get my palm in the same light as the scene.

 

But if you're dead set on trying an averaging meter, you should probably try to find a working EF (the fd camera body, not the digital lens series). It has a bottom-weighted averaging meter which should be better for landscape photography. The problem, of course, is finding a working body.

[chuck909]

I second the EF. Great Camera. Smooth as silk. Only drawback is that it is a tiny bit awkward to use manually. Too bad it had such a short run.

 

Palm of hand? I use the back. But if you are really serious about it, use a gray card.

Edited February 14, 2022 by chuck909

[steven_endo]

Yeah, apparently, all human palms have pretty much the same reflectivity regardless of your ethnicity. But the palms reflects about 35% which is why you need to open up one f-stop.

 

But, yeah, if you're going out to specifically photograph landscapes, it makes sense to take an 18% grey card.

[danac]

I might even go one step further and say then when you really get used to the 12% meter, averaging meters become the PITA.

 

I sure hope you are wrong about that. I love my A-1 and AE-1. :eek:

 

I just dug out my gray card - forgot I had it. It was only used once at a vintage British car show with good results.

[danac]

I have a confession to make. Before I received the first response to this thread (and this is after all, an AV-1 thread), I discovered a new-in-box AV-1 body on Ebay. That camera is now in Ken Oikawa's workshop in order to correct for any age related problems. It sat unwrapped in the box for forty years give or take. I simply couldn't resist. It's smaller and lighter than the other A series Canon bodies, is aperture priority which I am long used to and you can facilitate exposure compensation with the ASA dial. Just holding that camera in my hands was a delight.

 

Before I'm through, there may yet be an AT-1 and an EF in my modest collection. I will most likely keep the FTbn now. BTW, I need to expose six more frames of the present roll in the FTb. The results should be instructive.

[chuck909]

From the collector's point of view, sure, go for the AT-1. But it has nothing to offer that your other camera don't have. As an all-manual A series, it was never popular.

[chuck909]

Before I'm through, there may yet be an AT-1 and an EF in my modest collection. /QUOTE]

 

| eBay

Here's one:

CANON EF 35MM CAMERA BODY | eBay

[barryreid]

Before I'm through, there may yet be an AT-1 and an EF in my modest collection. I will most likely keep the FTbn now. BTW, I need to expose six more frames of the present roll in the FTb. The results should be instructive.

 

You have mentioned being an Aperture Priority shooter, that's something I share. Having owned a couple of EFs and AT-1's (and a couple of New F-1s) over the years, I'd offer that if you want some Heavy Metal, or a manual mode camera, it's probably better to get a New F-1 with an AE Finder FN in place of both. The F-1 shutter has a faster 1/2000th setting and you can change the meter patterns, maybe add a grid screen or a wait level finder. The New F-1 also has a nicer manual mode than the EF and can also share batteries with A-Series bodies, unlike the EF. The latter is a minor point but, nonetheless, helps when you take a couple of different bodies out.

[danac]

Of course, If I'm standing on the edge of Bryce Canyon, the needles of the Black Hills or in the Mariposa grove of giant Sequoias, I won't be holding anything but the A-1, FTb or my Mamiya 645E. Whatever I acquire all will be used regularly. There will be no shelf queens.

 

barryreid: If I can get comfortable with the FTb the F1 might be a consideration.

[chuck909]

barryreid: If I can get comfortable with the FTb the F1 might be a consideration.

 

If you do get a New F1 with the AE finder, the standard screen is averaging.

[danac]

My last roll with the FTb was a disaster. Folks, despite all of your help and encouragement and all of the intense studying about partial metering over the last several months, I have come to the conclusion that the 12% meter mode is definitely not for me. The images on this last roll (and four others) ranged from lousy to horrible with one or two exceptions. The magnitude of these failures was a new and unpleasant experience for me after decades of photography. So it's back to averaging meters.

[Bettendorf]

My last roll with the FTb was a disaster. Folks, I have come to the conclusion that the 12% meter mode is definitely not for me. The images on this last roll (and four others) ranged from lousy to horrible…]

 

Lousy to horrible? No offense Dana, but have you checked the FTb meter to a known accurate one? At 18 years old I exposed a couple rolls of Kodachrome 25 and 64 through my first new FTb and they turned out fine. I’m still using one.

[danac]

One year ago last January master technician Ken Oikawa thoroughly went over the camera. I trust his workmanship as I have for three other Canon bodies. I'm sure the fault is mine not the camera.

[jim_bielecki1]

Odd that there is so much exposure error. 12% isn't that different from averaging. Maybe try pointing a few of your cameras at a large, uniform surface (driveway, etc.), take a meter reading, and compare. The readings should be identical, no matter the metering system. Might tell you if your FTb is off or not.

[danac]

That sounds like a good idea.

[chuck909]

To figure out if your FTb is off, why not shoot one roll with it and another with your A-1. Shoot the same subject with the exact same exposures and at the same time of day. By the way, what battery are you using in the FTb? I don't think the time has come to give up.

[danac]

I tested the FTb meter against both the A-1 and AE-1 this morning. All cameras were set to 100 ASA and metered in the exact same outdoor lighting using a large clean 4x8 sheet of cardboard. I repeated the test several times. The A-1 and AE-1 both read f/8 at a shutter speed of 1/500. The FTb read half-way between f/11 and f/16 at the same speed. The manual says to use a PX625 battery which was 1.3V. Oikawa-san said to use the 1.5V 625A which is currently in the camera. Can someone please explain what is going on and what I should do about this?

[Ken Katz]

The difference in voltage between the old mercury battery required by the camera and the alkaline battery you are using is enough to cause the FTb to show 1.5 stops underexposure. If you look up mercury battery replacement in Google or PN you will see an enormous amount of information on the subject and many solutions. For my dad's Canonet, I use an alkaline battery and reduce my ASA by about 1 stop, which I calibrated using my EOS cameras and is sufficient for shooting print film. Unfortunately my dad's Canonet remains unused for the last decade or so. That much underexposure is likely the cause of your issues with the camera.

[steven_endo]

The manual says to use a PX625 battery which was 1.3V. Oikawa-san said to use the 1.5V 625A which is currently in the camera.

 

Hmmm...

 

Does this mean Oikawa-san recalibrated the meter to use the 1.5V 625A battery?

Edited February 18, 2022 by steven_endo

[danac]

Ken Oikawa is hard to understand. He speaks very quickly with a thick Japanese accent and my hearing is not what it once was. I have wondered about a possible voltage change. He surely would have written this on the invoice but there is nothing there about it. I don't think he has mail either.

[Bettendorf]

The fastest and easiest solution in this case then is to go back to the 4x8 cardboard with the other two cameras and set up again. Let's say your lighting was again at 1/500 and f/8. Set your FTb and lens aperture to the same and aim at target. Rotate ASA dial until the needle spits the lollipop. Look at your dial and you now have the new setting for 100 speed film. Something like 25 +2/3. Do the same test at ASA 400 and it should be 100 +2/3. If the readings are exactly 2 stops apart, the meter is probably accurate and you just make note of what your new settings will be. I've done this for a few of mine.

[danac]

The fastest and easiest solution in this case then is to go back to the 4x8 cardboard with the other two cameras and set up again. Let's say your lighting was again at 1/500 and f/8. Set your FTb and lens aperture to the same and aim at target. Rotate ASA dial until the needle spits the lollipop. Look at your dial and you now have the new setting for 100 speed film. Something like 25 +2/3. Do the same test at ASA 400 and it should be 100 +2/3. If the readings are exactly 2 stops apart, the meter is probably accurate and you just make note of what your new settings will be. I've done this for a few of mine.

 

I just tried this with both the AE-1 and FTb cameras set at 400 ASA and the same aperture and speed. Adjusting the FTb ASA dial as you said produced identical results with the FTb set to 100 +2/3. That's pretty handy but I wonder if a 1.35V Wein battery or a 386 watch battery inside of the M9 Criscam converter would be more permanent but just as accurate.. This would explain why my negatives were so lifeless (too pale with little contrast) especially since I was often adding more light to expose for the shadows. I just assumed that the camera had a voltage regulator that held the power supply to 1.35 volts or so.

 

If your "easy" solution were to become my MO for this camera would I develop at box speed or pull down to the new adjusted ASA?

[Bettendorf]

You would develop at box speed because you exposed at box speed. All you did was skew the meter to where "500 @ f/8 " was dead on, perfect exposure for ASA 100 film. At this stage the painted numbers on the dial were meaningless.