Considering a Canon New F-1, tell me about them

[Ken Ford]

I’ve been on a nostalgia kick for a few years inexpensively picking up cameras I either used to own (Nikon F, Pentax MX) or always wanted (Nikon FM2A and F5.) One camera I always admired back in the day but never owned was the Canon New F-1 (not the earlier all mechanical F-1 or F-1n.) I use these cameras sparingly, but nevertheless enjoy them.

The New F-1 was an interesting competitor to the F3 back in the 80s. I was all Nikon and Leica at the time, but one stringer from another paper had a pair of them. I thought they were pretty neat, too bad they were Canons. ;-)

I just fell into a AE Motor FN and AA battery pack for a song, so I think I’m going to keep an eye out for a clean New F-1 with the AE prism and one or two lenses. Is there anything I should watch out for? Who is the repair guru for Canons of this era in the case I want a CLA?

 

[Mackinaw]

A well designed, well engineered 35mm systems camera. Shutter-speed preferred automation with a motor or winder, aperture-preferred automation with the AE finder, choice of three different metering patterns (center weighted, spot, and a 12% rectangle) depending on the viewing screens used. Slower speeds to 1/60 are battery powered, speeds from 1/90 to 1/2000 operate without a battery. Well built and solid.

As for a good repair tech, Ken Oikawa in California. Ken’s a retired Canon repair tech who specializes in Canon FD and FL cameras/lenses. Excellent service with fast turnaround.

Jim B.

 

[aizan]

The New F-1 is the most Contax-ish feeling body Canon made, except for the shutter and film advance, which are "crunchy." I've seen a couple bodies at the camera show aside from mine, and they all make a metallic ping when you trip the shutter.

But whatever, it's a good camera. Great viewfinder (97% coverage) and metering display. It's my main 35mm SLR body, with the Nikon F and Pentax Spotmatic on the side for occasional recreational purposes, and the Pentax LX tempts me from afar.

 

[dxq.canada]

I had gone through many Canon SLR cameras ... and the New F-1 was the best.
Felt great in the hand, AE viewfinder is large, very bright ground screens ... dependable.
I used the Winder without the battery just as a grip.


... I actually like the crunchy winding noise it made.

 

[flagellum]

Probably my favorite 35mm camera, they’re built like bricks but also have a sort of rugged elegance to them. Honestly feels just as solid as my Leica M4, plus it has the nice combo of being a matte black (similar to a black chrome Leica) but also Brassing nicely. The only thing to keep in mind is the electronics; my first F-1 pretty much fell apart because the electronics went bit by bit. they don’t seem to be easy to fix in this regard, as even Ken Oikawa couldn’t set mine straight. As pro cameras, some have obviously had heavy use. Maybe not a camera that will work for another 100 Years to come, but one of the best built and most enjoyable cameras you can use right now.

Do see that whatever f-1 you buy has the motor caps included on the bottom plate, as the body will leak light without the one nearest the film cassette side. Many eBay f-1s don’t always have these.

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

I had one, and while it was an interesting camera, I would not buy another.

The system's design is kind of a kludge. To use aperture priority AE, you need the AE Prism finder. Actually, AE works with the standard finder, but you don't get any readout in the finder of what shutter speed is going to be used. This is silly; there's no reason to require a separate finder for Aperture Priority AE. Every other camera that offers it, like the Nikon F3, does so without requiring an expensive viewfinder.

Shutter Priority AE won't work at all without a motor drive or winder attached! You sometimes see this explained away as "The camera needs more battery power for Shutter Priority, and the winder or motor provides it." That may be so, but there is also a mechanical connection between the camera and winder or motor that actually operates part of the Shutter Priority AE mechanism in the camera. Canon managed to put this feature in the AE-1 and A1 bodies without requiring a heavy, expensive wonder or motor to make it work.

The metering pattern selection is one of the worst parts of the system. The camera offers the choice of Centerweighted, Partial Metering (a large rectangle in the middle of the screen), and Spot metering. This is nice, but unlike the Olympus OM-4 (a contemporary of the New F-1), you cannot change metering pattern by pushing a button. You have to change the focusing screen! The screens control meter pattern because a prism built into each screen redirects some of the light to the camera's meter cell. The size and shape of this prism inside the focusing screen determines the meter pattern.

This sucks for two reasons: You're stuck with the screen's meter pattern unless you go to the bother of installing a different screen, and the area of the meter pattern in the Partial and Spot screens is a bit darker than the rest of the screen. Because this is in the middle of the screen, where the focusing aids are located, it actually makes focusing a little harder!

Another issue I had was that the metering indicator in the viewfinder in manual mode was often inaccurate. There's a scale of lens apertures and a moving needle. The needle points to the aperture the meter thinks you should use. This was always accurate. The problem is there's a second indicator, a circle, that moves when you change the aperture on your lens. This circle moves over the aperture scale in the finder to show you what aperture you have the lens set at. With some lenses I had, the circle indicator was off a half a stop or so. Repairmen told me conflicting stories on this. Some said the lenses needed adjustment, others said it was impossible to fix. The thing is, Canon could have avoided the whole damned problem by using a little lens that looked at the actual lens aperture ring to show the aperture set. The AE finder does this, but ONLY in the Aperture Priority AE mode. In manual, even with the AE finder, you got the aperture scale with the inaccurate moving circle.

 

[aizan]

Every other camera that offers it, like the Nikon F3, does so without requiring an expensive viewfinder.

Almost all New F-1's come with the AE finder, so it's not really an additional expense. It's more likely that you'll have to hunt down a non-metered finder if you want one.

The metering pattern selection is one of the worst parts of the system. The camera offers the choice of Centerweighted, Partial Metering (a large rectangle in the middle of the screen), and Spot metering. This is nice, but unlike the Olympus OM-4 (a contemporary of the New F-1), you cannot change metering pattern by pushing a button. You have to change the focusing screen! The screens control meter pattern because a prism built into each screen redirects some of the light to the camera's meter cell. The size and shape of this prism inside the focusing screen determines the meter pattern.

This sucks for two reasons: You're stuck with the screen's meter pattern unless you go to the bother of installing a different screen, and the area of the meter pattern in the Partial and Spot screens is a bit darker than the rest of the screen. Because this is in the middle of the screen, where the focusing aids are located, it actually makes focusing a little harder!

This just points to the Olympus OM-4's strength, because none of the comparable cameras at the time had metering systems that were as advanced. The Nikon F3 had a heavy center-weighted metering with no other options. The Pentax LX also only had center-weighted. Second place isn't so bad.

Another issue I had was that the metering indicator in the viewfinder in manual mode was often inaccurate. There's a scale of lens apertures and a moving needle. The needle points to the aperture the meter thinks you should use. This was always accurate. The problem is there's a second indicator, a circle, that moves when you change the aperture on your lens. This circle moves over the aperture scale in the finder to show you what aperture you have the lens set at. With some lenses I had, the circle indicator was off a half a stop or so. Repairmen told me conflicting stories on this. Some said the lenses needed adjustment, others said it was impossible to fix. The thing is, Canon could have avoided the whole damned problem by using a little lens that looked at the actual lens aperture ring to show the aperture set. The AE finder does this, but ONLY in the Aperture Priority AE mode. In manual, even with the AE finder, you got the aperture scale with the inaccurate moving circle.

This is something I've had to adjust on one of my Canon FD lenses. The lens repair manual explains how to fix it, and it's pretty easy. I don't know why repairmen would give conflicting opinions.

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

This just points to the Olympus OM-4's strength, because none of the comparable cameras at the time had metering systems that were as advanced. The Nikon F3 had a heavy center-weighted metering with no other options. The Pentax LX also only had center-weighted. Second place isn't so bad.

Yeah, but Canon really chose just about the most byzantine way possible to implement the different meter patterns. It also made the focusing screens expensive because they were quite complex in design and construction, and the spot screens today are rare and expensive.

This is something I've had to adjust on one of my Canon FD lenses. The lens repair manual explains how to fix it, and it's pretty easy. I don't know why repairmen would give conflicting opinions.

Probably because they didn't know how to fix the problem. Not every camera tech is competent, and that is a fairly obscure problem. I wish I had that repair manual, I'd have fixed mine!

 

[rodt16s]

This is something I've had to adjust on one of my Canon FD lenses. The lens repair manual explains how to fix it, and it's pretty easy. I don't know why repairmen would give conflicting opinions.

Mine has this issue.
How simple is it to adjust..? it is really annoying

 

[Ken Ford]

Great info, everyone!

As I said, this will be a side dalliance if I go through with it. I’m likely to only have one or two lenses, three at most - I don’t know Canon FD series lenses very well, but a 35 or 50 will likely be the first and possibly last, and maybe a 100 down the road if I find one at a reasonable price. The whole metering pattern thing is odd, but not really a concern - I’m happy with centerweighted.

I was a little surprised to see the camera does not take power from the motor or winder, that is a great feature of the F3 - none of mine over the years have ever had button batteries installed since they’ve all been motorized. And this motor is going to be a beast with *12* AAs, luckily I use Eneloops so the weight will be slightly reduced. This will be like back in my yoot when I had a pair of motorized F2s on my body at work, it was like doing calisthenics.

 

[aizan]

here are the pages that show how to adjust the aperture signal lever. if you want the whole manual, send me a pm and i'll forward a google drive link.

 

[Steve M.]

They're really nice. Take FD and FL lenses, as well as Leica R and Nikon lenses w/ a $20 adapter (you put a $20 Nikon to Leica R mount on the Leica lens, then a Nikon to FD adapter. Works like a charm, and adds very little weight or length to the setup). You can also mount m42 screw mount lenses w/ a cheap adapter. It's a heavy camera, so it's stable. Build quality is professional. My preference is for the original F1 bodies. People often do a double take when they see the prong of a Nikon pre AI lens on a Canon camera :]

It's also big and heavy, as you know if you shoot the earlier versions. I preferred the Nikkormat cameras, but the Canon has better features and is more adaptable to other lenses. Different focus screens are available for the F1, but tend to be a little pricey.

The FD 50 1.4 and FD 85 1.8 are superb lenses (FL versions are great too, but they have different optical formulas than the FD lenses), and the 100 2.5 is a real sleeper. The 100 and 85 are excellent for portraits. When I had my F1, several older newspaper photographers came up to me to say how much they loved theirs back in the day, and how rugged they were.

 

[rodt16s]

Thanks for that info
Seems to affect all my lenses, which makes me wonder if it's the body

 

[Mackinaw]

.......The 50 1.4 and 85 1.8 are superb lenses, and the 100 2.5 is a real sleeper. The 100 and 85 are excellent for portraits.

100/2.5? Don't you mean 100/2.8?

Kubrick thought so highly of the FD 50/1.4, he hacked one to fit on a movie camera.

Jim B.

 

[Ken Ford]

Thanks for the information, aizan - if you put the whole manual out there, I’ll take it!

Does anyone have firsthand info on the performance of the 100/2 vs. the 100/2.8?

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

Thanks for the information, aizan - if you put the whole manual out there, I’ll take it!

Does anyone have firsthand info on the performance of the 100/2 vs. the 100/2.8?

I have never used the 100mm f2, but I did have the 100mm f2.8 and it was VERY sharp and had nice bokeh.

Another really great lens was the 35mm f2.8; incredibly sharp, even wide open. I have also used 35mm lenses from Olympus, Nikon, Leica, and Zeiss (M-Mount ZM). The only lens that was equal to the Canon 35/2.8 was the Zeiss ZM 35mm f2.8C.

The 28mm f2.8 FD was sharp but had a lot of light falloff in the corners and edges. I had not seen that in Olympus or Nikon 28/2.8 lenses.

Make sure you buy the "New FD" series lenses, not the older FD lenses. The old ones have the silver ring you turn to lock the lens to the body, while the New FD lenses act more like a bayonet mount lens. The reason for saying to get the new-style is that if you use the AE Finder to do aperture-priority AE, the little lens that looks at the aperture setting on the lens cannot see the aperture ring on the old style lenses, so you lose that ability to see what aperture you have set in the finder.

If you only shoot manual, it doesn't matter. The old lenses are all metal, while the new ones have some plastic parts and are a lot lighter and more compact.

 

[Ken Ford]

I have never used the 100mm f2, but I did have the 100mm f2.8 and it was VERY sharp and had nice bokeh.


Another really great lens was the 35mm f2.8; incredibly sharp, even wide open. I have also used 35mm lenses from Olympus, Nikon, Leica, and Zeiss (M-Mount ZM). The only lens that was equal to the Canon 35/2.8 was the Zeiss ZM 35mm f2.8C.


The 28mm f2.8 FD was sharp but had a lot of light falloff in the corners and edges. I had not seen that in Olympus or Nikon 28/2.8 lenses.


Make sure you buy the "New FD" series lenses, not the older FD lenses. The old ones have the silver ring you turn to lock the lens to the body, while the New FD lenses act more like a bayonet mount lens. The reason for saying to get the new-style is that if you use the AE Finder to do aperture-priority AE, the little lens that looks at the aperture setting on the lens cannot see the aperture ring on the old style lenses, so you lose that ability to see what aperture you have set in the finder.


If you only shoot manual, it doesn't matter. The old lenses are all metal, while the new ones have some plastic parts and are a lot lighter and more compact.

Thanks! I was planning on sticking with the later non-chrome breech ring lenses, I had read about the ADR issues with the older ones.

 

[Mackinaw]

Thanks! I was planning on sticking with the later non-chrome breech ring lenses, I had read about the ADR issues with the older ones.

ADR issues? What's that?

I only use the older breechlock mount lenses on my old F-1. Superb “they-don’t-make-them-like-this-anymore” build quality. All metal, a lot of brass, etc. Chris is right that the FDn lenses can be substantially smaller and lighter than the older FD lenses, but take them apart, (I have) and you see why (plastic). Plus the bayonet-style mount isn’t as robustly built as the original breechlock ring versions.

Personal preference I suppose. Both the FD and FDn lenses work well. I’m sure you’ll be happy with whatever you buy.

Jim B.

 

[xayraa33]

The Canon New F 1 is one of my favourite 35mm film SLR cameras, and it is on par with my Olympus OM 1 as the go to film SLR.

I never got into the Nikon gear, other than my RF S2 camera and their Nikkor LTM lenses for my Barnacks.

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

ADR issues? What's that?

Its what I explained in post #16. ADR stands for Aperture Direct Readout. Some cameras have a little lens built into the prism that projects an image of the lens's aperture ring to the viewfinder.

The Canon New F-1 has this with the AE Finder, but not the Standard Prism. If you use the AE Finder and want to see the aperture set on the lens through the ADR readout in the finder, you must use the New FD series lenses.