denny_rane

<p>This has been a Real Interesting lesson in camera history. I was born 1960...so was in High School in 75-79. The perception at that time, for a teenager, was that Nikon did not have an "entry level" camera that a 16 year old could afford. The Canon AE-1 was a flood-gate for many young, would-be photographers. Nikon seemed like a Porsche 911, and Canon a Datsun 510 We all wanted the 911, but we drove and could afford the 510. Whether or not that was true, I don't know. We just assumed Nikon was out of reach, and never really pursued that brand.<br> We mostly shot Black and White, and would have just the Negatives developed, and then would rent darkroom time at a local camera store. I am probably (partly) reliving my youth by buying these Canon's now :-)<br> Another thing we had trouble affording was the Canon brand lens. Vivitar was what me mostly bought. Their lenses all seemed to work fine, but the guys at the camera store often complained about the quality of the Vivitar "optics". Our pictures never seemed to suffer because we screwed a Vivitar tube to the end of our AE-1 :-)<br> Thanks Again for all of your guys experience.....it has made for some very enjoyable reading.</p>

<p>All good points...Thank You.<br> Having just gotten back into cameras, I had no idea about any of "this". Like with so many things, Canon changing mount scenarios was a blessing and a curse. It has been good for me becaise I can pickup good bodies and lenses for cheap. But not so good for guys owning a bunch of Canon product that want to take it into the Digital age. I remember going to San Jose Camera (circa 1979) and looking at all the Canon lenses for my AE-1. I was floored by the pricing. I boiught a few Vivitar tubes becuase the Canon Brand was so much more expensive.<br />I wonder how much difference there was between those Vivitar lens and the Canon stamped glass.?<br> If I were into Nikon, I would be shelling out a lot more money than I am for the FD stuff I have bought from E-Bay recently. <br> Thanks Again for all the great info and insight. </p>

<br /> Craig -Very interesting info indeed.<br /> Thanks Again<br /> <br />Thanks Leszek.</p>

<p>I am just now getting back into cameras.<br> I had an AE-1 in the 1977-1980 time frame...did some darkroom work, usually from developed negatives. I now have an A-1 and AE1-P.<br> Anyway.....it seemed like any "event" we were at (race track, rock concert, baseball game, etc etc) most of the pro-photographers used a Nikon Camera. We would see the occasional Canon F1 and A1, but not too many.<br> In that day, was the Nikon a much "better" camera than the Canon.? Perhaps it could take a beating and hold up better than a Canon.?<br> Even today those F Series Nikon command a pretty big price.<br> Thank You</p>