In my last post (8th January 24) I explained how I obtained three lovely vintage TTL metered film cameras and how I wanted to compare them. Here’s how it went…
In the morning of the test shoot I loaded the three cameras with 35mm film, using Ilford HP5+. The Canon AE-1 and Nikon FE loaded smoothly and the Zenit TTL was a little more difficult, though nowhere near as tough as my wife’s Zenit B (which is notorious for ripping film sprockets).
Once all three were loaded up I made a self-portrait photograph in my studio mirror holding each camera in turn, partly as a test image but also so that I could identify which negatives belonged to which camera when they came back from the lab.
Top: Canon AE-1, middle Nikon FE and bottom Zenit TTL
I took all three cameras along to my local park for the tests. The winter weather was fair for the time of year, if a little on the dull and grey side but the light was flat and reasonably consistent.
I took along my Leningrad light meter to test the through-the-lens metering of the cameras.
As I was walking up to the park I realised just how heavy the 3 analogue cameras were when compared to my digital counterparts. It was just as well it was only a 20 minute walk!
First shots – meters, viewfinders and handling
First out of the camera bag was the Nikon FE. The TTL meter and my Leningrad appeared to agree and so I focussed the lens (A Nikkor-H.C. 50mm ). It was very smooth to use. Both camera and lens were beautifully crafted and the image appearing through the viewfinder was clear even though the light was a little flat and overcast. I waited until a little sun appeared giving faint shadows then focussed on my subject, checked the internal meter needle and pressed the shutter making my first test image.
I repeated the process with Canon AE-1 using the 50mm ‘chrome nose’ lens and finally with the Zenit TTL and the MC Helios 44-4K 58mm lens.
The Canon also had a very clear viewfinder and operated smoothly with the internal meter needle being clear and easy to read, very similar to the Nikon in many ways. Once again, I focussed on my subject, checked the internal meter and pressed the shutter release making my second test image.
Canon AE-1 test image one.
The Zenit TTL viewfinder was, by comparison, much darker but perfectly usable. The focussing ring on the Helios 44mm lens was not as smooth and the metering system (viewed through the viewfinder) differed in that it showed a needle that had to be centered on a circle in the middle with a plus and minus sign above and below. I found this to be more unstable than the other two but once I grew used to the way it worked it was fine. I later found out that the instability was due to the battery being a little loose in the housing. Once removed and tightened up, the meter was far better. I focussed on my subject for the third time, checked the internal meter and pressed the shutter making my third test image.
Luckily the light had not altered to any significant degree as this would have spoiled my test.
Zenit TTL test image one.
Handling – weight and operation
The lightest of the three was the Nikon by far, with the Canon being weighed down with the heavy ‘Chrome-nose’ lens coming in second and the Zenit TTL being the overall heaviest by a fair margin.
All three cameras were solidly built and handled very well. Next to my Praktica and the Zenit B they all felt more refined with better viewfinders, winding mechanisms and lenses – although I have a soft spot for the Zenit B’s Industar 50-2, 3.5/50 lens.
More examples follow...
Nikon test image two.
Canon test image two.
Zenit test image two.
In conclusion
When it comes to the cameras themselves, there is little that separates them. They all worked well on the day apart from the loose battery housing in the Zenit. By far the lightest was the Nikon FE and if you were out all day that may be an advantage. The clarity of the Canon and Nikon viewfinders are also worth pointing out, helping with clearer detail when focussing. Having said that, unless the light was really poor the Zenit coped well enough in that department also.
So what it finally comes down to are the results. This was not a scientific experiment by any means but simply something I wanted to try as I got used to handling the cameras. The images above have very little post-processing apart from a little light adjustment. In the end it comes down to personal taste. I found the Nikon produced images with higher contrast, the Zenit with more mid-tones and the Canon somewhere between the two.
I suppose for me, the surprise was how well the Zenit TTL performed. (My charity shop purchase - see my previous post). I think this is down to the Helios 44mm lens which captures a really pleasing, yet softer overall result, possibly lending itself to portraits and people.
I should also add that the scans are not professionally done and therefore the images shown are only an indication of the captured frames on the day.
It was an interesting experiment for me and I'm happy to have three such good cameras as a part of my kit. Clearly a more exhaustive test would be better with controlled lighting etc but this was just fun and interesting to do and I hope it has been of some use to other analogue users out there. For me at least I know all three cameras are in good working order and I will be happy to use any of them again - but not all together, they are simply too heavy to carry around!