gwhitegeog

Hi - wasn't aware of that - hadn't used it for a while. What a shame. If you come across PC Version 1 that is for the F5, please let me have a copy. Best Gary

Sure. It’s too big to upload here. If you give me your email address I can send it by FTP. g

PS. I had a T-70 for a while before the T-90 came out. I used to do a lot of cycling and hillwalking and it was an ideal camera for slide photography and travelling. Small, compact, powered by 2 x AA batteries and it had partial metering.

On balance, the T-90 was a proving ground for many things that were to come. It was almost a 'run-out special' that you see from car dealers from time to time - just a few made and they won't be round for long (a had a 1982 BMW 323i like that once!). The A-series range was a boon for Canon and boosted their sales and their image. The A-1 was my first 'real' camera that I owned outright. Long term, the A-series was a bit limited for me - slow top shutter speed (just 1/1000), 1/60 flash sync and weak shutters and just CWA metering. When working as a pro in the late 80s (when you could make money from photography), I used medium format and the Canon F1n for weddings, commissions, etc and the T-90 for all my stock photography. The F1n was probably the best camera of the era and actually better than the much vaunted Nikon F3. It's only weakness was its primitive flash system. I have a New F1 body from 1982 that is still going strong and probably still has the best viewfinder display of that era.

Hi Ben, Afraid not - I only have the PC version. Obviously, we are dealing with 25 year old cameras and software, so it's a struggle. I managed to get an Nikon MC-35 lead (sic) which was for early GPS connections with a serial port - 10 pin Nikon lead (male to male) and my PC has a serial PCI card, which I keep for running legacy devices. The correct MC-33 lead? I only ever saw one in eBay in the US with the PhotoSec floppy discs but the seller wanted $140! G

In terms of Photo Secretary v2 which can run with the F5 or the F100 etc, (but is not available anymore), as long as you have a suitable cable: I have all the PC software and manuals, and some extras saved in a .zip file, if anyone would like it. It includes an exe. installer that will run the software on Windows 10 64-bit and Windows 11. It works fine with both my Windows 10 and 11 desktop and laptop and talk to the F5 just fine.. Gary

Thanks, I have just been looking and I haven't seen a serial number higher than the 221xxx that you quoted, so far. I'll keep looking from time to time, but it looks like it might be 250,000 total production or a bit more. Certainly no more than 300,000. Apparently, the date codes were stamped when they were boxed up to leave the factory, which means that the camera may have been made some time before. There's an awful lot around - and about 50% are non-functioning 'sold for parts' or in very rough condition. The camera had great features and was innovative but they didn't build it with a pro-spec shutter (and made very few spare shutter units). Most Nikons of the that era still have very good working shutters. The Canon F1/F1n were exceptions but a lot of the A-series and T-90 shutters have packed up. Funnily enough, the T-70s seem better.

Thanks for the useful tip, Jim. My two working T-90s are 1071xxx and 1186xxx, so that suggests the 71,000th and 186,000th cameras made. I know from the 'film chamber code' (on the T-90 actually under the rear lip of the grip on the right hand side, viewable from inside the camera when the back is open near the hinge) that both models are 1986 - April and October and made at Oita. So roughly they made 100,000 in 7 months or about 14,000 per month. If it were made for 3 years (assuming same rate of production, which is unlikely.) that's 500,000. But an old Canon pro dealer friend of mine who remembers the FD / early EOS era and had several tours of Canon production facilities at that time, said it was actually only made for two years (or less) and then stockpiled, as they were clearing production space for EOS. I have a 'for parts' non-working T-90 that is 1128xxx, so again 1986. All I need to do is find out the last serial number made! Nikon made 1 million F's from 1959 to 1970 but camera sales had picked up by the mid-80s with the SLR boom and automated production was faster. A figure of 300,000 was quoted once for the T-90, so that seems reasonable. I'll look on eBay for the highest number I can see, LOL.

Thanks, I couldn’t see anything there about production numbers. Did I miss it? gary

By the way, does anyone know the production run of the T-90? I often wonder how many were made….but I can’t find the information anywhere. It was only really made ‘86-‘89.

I agree with Jim - I don't think overall this is a problem. FD lenses are very strong.

There are mount adapters around - EOS Magazine in the UK used to market one - not sure if it still is sold.

In terms of 'replacements' I think NiMH would be fine - they perform similarly to alkaline. But I'd be tempted to rewind the film manually! G

To my knowledge and from my experience, Canon FD have full half stop clicks (e.g, f1.4, f.1.8, f2.0, f2.5) and meter automatically as such. Nikkor pre-AI / AI lenses may have a continuous aperture but it is click stopped at full stops only. Thus, if you try to set a half way position, there is a danger it will not hold. All modern AF lenses with electronic irises have 1/3 stops. I always used Canon in the film days when I used Kodachrome and Fujichrome slow slide film and wanted 1/3 stop adjustments. Using the F1n or T90 on aperture priority whereby the camera could set the shutter speed steplessly, you could get very accurate exposures, with 1/2 stops on the lenses. Am just looking now in my hand at an early AF-D 20mm f2.8 Nikkor. The aperture scale is quite firm and will hold at say f9.5 between f8 and f11 and the meter coupling ring moves accordingly. But I still prefer the Canon system.

PS yes I agree about the Nikon F. I love that camera, it is beautiful to use and just goes on and on. The only thing I find limiting in real world use is the slow 1/1000 top shutter speed. But then I am dealing with a camera designed almost 70 years ago!

Yes, the fun of running older cameras. I can't beat Gus's collection but I own about 10x F-era Nikon bodies, F thru to F6. I have a 1969 F body, so 54 years old and still going strong. My technician in Lisbon refused to service it recently as he said it didn't need it (unlike its FTn finder meter which he is rebuilding). FE / FE2s / FM and FM2s bodies abound at fair prices. The FA is a bit more expensive and the FM3a more so. If I have a cosmetically and mechanically good body but the shutter fails, I buy another body with a working shutter to cannibalise. I don't buy separate shutter units - if they have been removed from a body, more chance of damage. I buy a body, so I can keep other bits as spares too and get my technician to remove the shutter unit. The shutter s/h on its own can be almost as much to buy as as a complete camera. I have three F4s bodies. One doesn't work due to excessive battery leakage before I bought it, but I have two mint working models. The damaged body's shutter works and is otherwise is okay. I have an FM2 and an FE2 'rough' bodies to keep as future spare against shutter failures in my working cameras. The Canon T-90 I have was made by servicing a mint (but hardly used) body that had been stored in its purchase box for 30 years with a seized shutter, with a donor shutter from a working body. Canon 35mm bodies 1975-2000 are much more likely to have shutter failures than Nikons, they generally were not as well made, especially the A-series and T-90. Though the F1 and F1n were very robust. My 1973 and 1981 bodies respectively are still going strong. On the whole, mechanical shutters hold up better and are less spares-dependent to keep in use than electronic (though the F4 - F6 were superb). My 1974 Nikon F2 still has perfect shutter speeds (measured technically, not just my judgement) and there is little else to go wrong. Just had a Nikkor 50mm f1.4 and 24mm f2.8 pre-AI converted to AI and they work a dream on the F2. Of course, big advantage of Canon FD lenses is that they all work with all bodies, with no compromises or limitations and they all have proper click half stops on the apertures. They were optically as good as Nikon and very well made (and all had bayonet lenses hoods) but in my experience, the Nikon bodies of that era were superior and more robust, exception being Canon F1n.

I think it was doubly-doomed as Canon were trying to retain the FD mount at that point.

The T-80 was a bit of a dead end (like the Nikon F3AF) until they sorted out the new autofocus system. The camera itself had limitations too - was it program only as I recall? G

Yes, it's not like the problem with the old discontinued PX628 mercury cell for the old F1 etc, where the new silver oxide ones are the wrong voltage (1.5v versus 1.35v if I recall). I bought a pack of 12 x PX28s online last year. They are all alkaline and give a nominal 6v an work fine with new F1, A1 etc. GW

Canon F1, 35mm f2.0 FD lens, ECN250D negative film exposed at ISO125. Hand held, 1/250 @f2.5

I agree about the F5 - I have one too and though overall it is better than the F4 (focussing, ability to get the best from later lenses, etc), I think the F4 is the classic. The Contax RTS was a beauty. I think the problem with the T-90 was they crammed in all they could at the end of the FD era - it was the pinnacle really - and enthusiasts and pros adopted it with alacrity and many got hammered but Canon had only fitted an 'amateur' shutter mechanism to it. Probably, they would have redesigned it were it not for the fact it really only had a 3 year production run and Canon were paying attention to EOS then. I have one good working T-90 body (and two u/s bodies for spares) and I fire the shutter across the range at least once a month to exercise the shutter! I also store it very carefully.

Having built up a very large collection of Canon and Nikon manual focus lenses from the 1970s- 1990s (about 35 lenses at the last count), I have now taken an informed overview about the two marques. 1. Nikon lenses were slightly better made. Less likely to yellow, or the aperture iris stop working etc. Or fall apart. 2. Canon lenses were better designed. All from 1971 do what it took Nikon another 10 years to get round to - all index automatically, no faffing around with rabbit ear connectors, or not working on some metering heads, etc. 3. Canon lenses are better in that they all have proper half stops - crucial if you shoot (shot) slide film. Nikon don't. For me, this is the major shortcoming of Nikon lenses of the era. 4. Possibly, Nikon lenses are slightly optically superior, lens for lens, though there are so many variables, that is a difficult one to call. 5. The F mount continuity is admirable with Nikon, though of course they paid the price initially in their poor auto focus design. 6. Owning about 15 Nikon and Canon bodies, and still using them all regularly, I'd say probably that the Nikon F4 was the best 35mm film camera ever made (I don't know much about Leicas!). I'd put the Canon T-90 a close second, though they are far less reliable mechanically than the F4. Gary

Obviously, we all live in different parts of the world, but if anyone wants to know details of good repairers in London or Portugal, I can pass that information on... Gary

The T-70 is one of the few A / T / F series cameras of that era that I do not own in my collection, or have desired to own. I had very fond memories of it and as I said above, it was a very useful camera at the time. But unlike the T-90, it's appeal has faded. I agree about the winding too.

I did have this issue many years ago, when I was about 16 years' old and the my A1 body was a new birthday present from my dad! I had that body for many years and about 1990, I had it serviced by a classic camera shop in central London and they fixed the problem. I think it required the disassembly of the mirror box. Not sure which country you are in, but if you can find a good technician who can service Canon FD era cameras, I think it is an easy adjustment whilst s/he does the main service.