I have recently bought the Canonflex R 2000 and find it a very lovely camera. It’s in a need of a serious cla , but will send it off to repair, when possible. I have heard of these cameras, some time ago, but did focus on the three versions of Canon F1. I’m 63 years old, and have been photographing since 1976 with Canon. This is the first time I have seen one of these cameras close up. I guess my R 2000 is the only of its kind in Denmark where I live. I like your presentations. ❤❤❤
Yes, lovely cameras and worth the expense of servicing. The F1 series cameras were a step up though and corrected some of Canon’s earlier mistakes! Thanks for commenting.
Great explanation. The bottom-wind lever was similar to those on many other cameras, rangefinder and SLR, but it wasn't based on Canon rangefinders. Those used a copy of the Leicavit trigger-style advance and were always complemented by top-wind versions as in Canon Vt and VL etc. In all trigger advance versions there was also the option of a knob wind on the top so the tripod issue wasn't as much a problem. The Canonflex was a tentative step into SLRs whereas Nikon took all the best features of earlier Exacta, Asahi etc models and combined them into the perfect combination right out of the gate. Most experienced photogs were familiar with the Nikon rangefinders on which the F was based and their reputation helped the F's reception.
Disastrous! Poor choice of a description of this excellent camera. I purchased mine in a Tokyo Camera shop in 1959 and used it professionally for nearly 30 years. Canon Japan invited me to return my camera to their Japanese factory for a service and use of camera for advertising purposes which was quite interesting. That was after 15 years continuous use. The winder action is first class and perhaps your critic is unaware of the tripod mount available so one can wind on while in use ? The meter , which is clipped to the front of the body , is in perfect condition - not bad for its age.
It’s a great camera. I’m not debating that. But it failed to challenge Nikon and others for market share. So in that respect, a disaster. It took Canon decades to capture a significant share of the professional market.
Hohoho! My Exakta 66 Mod.3 is the first one! Why? I've asked Mr. Enderlein from Schneider Dresden to made a mirror lock up for me. He makes it and name it Exakta 66 Mod.3. .....but only 200! were built. I'm proud to find this very very little series in many catalogs. Ps. the mirror lock up was realy a fail. Very tricky.
I've got the RP, the budget version of OG Canonflex Budget model? Yes Budget quality? Far from that The film winding lever is indeed weird Made operation on a tripod is unnecessarily difficult, but its quirkiness is the highlight of this camera, every time I showed up with the RP, my fellow film photographers who have never seen this before are curious about this feature Very well built, heavy, reliable, while the design is futuristic and beautiful Those qualities, apart from the design, carried on to FTb which I have as well, perfect for my workhorse
I have the later Canonflex RM (1962, I think), and it's clear that Canon tried to correct a few design blunders of the first series. The RM has, thankfully, the winding crank in the expected place, and the light meter is integrated (the selenium cell miraculously still works on my model; it's still quite responsive to light). It's a clichéd expression, but these cameras were truly built like tanks. I still enjoy shooting with it every now and then. Got it in good condition back in 2007 for $40(*), with a 50mm ƒ1.8 lens, with just a blemish on the focusing screen that really doesn't affect shooting. Cheers! //Rick (*) Yes, only forty dollars. The seller had probably no idea of what camera it was, and maybe they confused it with one of the cheaper FL bodies Canon produced later.
My 1959 Canonflex is in good condition despite being carried all over the world and subject to all sorts of difficult conditions.Handling it now I had forgotten how heavy it is. My early model was sold in a box-like container plus the tripod mount, flash which attached to end of the body and an excellent light meter . It may not have competed against Nikons product then but in Japan in December 1959 it was top of the pops and duty free, a bargain.
It’s the strangest system. One ring is operated by the automatic spot-down mechanism (so you can view at full aperture and the iris will shut down to the required setting when you press the shutter). The other is a manual stop down - presumably to check depth of field (or possibly … I’m only guessing now … to allow use on Canon rangefinder cameras?)
Excellent video - what a great find to have such a low serial numbered camera and lens. They may have stumbled out the gate but I'd say the Canon F-1 and New F-1 were actually better than the later model F and F2 IMO. For one, every Canon F-1 came with a metered prism - no oversized monster needed to be able to get up and running and as you've pointed out, the Canon breech mount lenses were quicker to change in the field and could be done one-handed in a pinch. Nikon kept buyers constantly upgrading their viewfinders with limited benefits to their users. Once the FD lens mount came along Canon didn't have to modify anything to be able to use their lenses as their line of cameras expanded - no "bunny ears" sticking out.
Thanks for commenting. Canon Vs Nikon … it’s an age old debate! They both have their strengths. I love Canon’s breech lock mount and never understood why it was dropped.
Thanks for comment - it’s always appreciated. At the time many lenses were available for Canon’s rangefinder cameras. But, for whatever reason, they weren’t released with the SLR. Perhaps Canon was waiting for sales volumes to increase which, of course, they never did.
![[UA] NAVI проти G2 Esports | Blast Premier Fall Final](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/QWlIm4FGESQ/mqdefault.jpg)
I have recently bought the Canonflex R 2000 and find it a very lovely camera. It’s in a need of a serious cla , but will send it off to repair, when possible. I have heard of these cameras, some time ago, but did focus on the three versions of Canon F1. I’m 63 years old, and have been photographing since 1976 with Canon. This is the first time I have seen one of these cameras close up. I guess my R 2000 is the only of its kind in Denmark where I live.
I like your presentations. ❤❤❤
Yes, lovely cameras and worth the expense of servicing. The F1 series cameras were a step up though and corrected some of Canon’s earlier mistakes! Thanks for commenting.
Great explanation. The bottom-wind lever was similar to those on many other cameras, rangefinder and SLR, but it wasn't based on Canon rangefinders. Those used a copy of the Leicavit trigger-style advance and were always complemented by top-wind versions as in Canon Vt and VL etc. In all trigger advance versions there was also the option of a knob wind on the top so the tripod issue wasn't as much a problem. The Canonflex was a tentative step into SLRs whereas Nikon took all the best features of earlier Exacta, Asahi etc models and combined them into the perfect combination right out of the gate. Most experienced photogs were familiar with the Nikon rangefinders on which the F was based and their reputation helped the F's reception.
Thanks for commenting - appreciated
I love my RM and the FL lenses that I have. Bought it in 1968 for $100.
Yes, agree. Look after early mechanical Canon and it’ll last forever.
It wasn’t a sales success, but still a solid camera and fun to shoot, I have the first model.
Yes, beautifully made.
Disastrous! Poor choice of a description of this excellent camera. I purchased mine in a Tokyo Camera shop in 1959 and used it professionally for nearly 30 years. Canon Japan invited me to return my camera to their Japanese factory for a service and use of camera for advertising purposes which was quite interesting. That was after 15 years continuous use. The winder action is first class and perhaps your critic is unaware of the tripod mount available so one can wind on while in use ? The meter , which is clipped to the front of the body , is in perfect condition - not bad for its age.
It’s a great camera. I’m not debating that. But it failed to challenge Nikon and others for market share. So in that respect, a disaster. It took Canon decades to capture a significant share of the professional market.
The Canon F1, F1n and F1 new were all top pro cameras before the plastic EOS Cameras were on the scene.!
Yes, the Canon F1 series cameras were/are fantastic but still weren’t enough to dent Nikon’s market share. The ‘plastic’ EOS cameras eventually did!
Until they came out the F series of Nikon already took off and had gained a good reputation among journalists.
Hohoho! My Exakta 66 Mod.3 is the first one! Why? I've asked Mr. Enderlein from Schneider Dresden to made a mirror lock up for me. He makes it and name it Exakta 66 Mod.3. .....but only 200! were built. I'm proud to find this very very little series in many catalogs. Ps. the mirror lock up was realy a fail. Very tricky.
👍
I've got the RP, the budget version of OG Canonflex
Budget model? Yes
Budget quality? Far from that
The film winding lever is indeed weird
Made operation on a tripod is unnecessarily difficult, but its quirkiness is the highlight of this camera, every time I showed up with the RP, my fellow film photographers who have never seen this before are curious about this feature
Very well built, heavy, reliable, while the design is futuristic and beautiful
Those qualities, apart from the design, carried on to FTb which I have as well, perfect for my workhorse
Thanks for commenting
I have the later Canonflex RM (1962, I think), and it's clear that Canon tried to correct a few design blunders of the first series. The RM has, thankfully, the winding crank in the expected place, and the light meter is integrated (the selenium cell miraculously still works on my model; it's still quite responsive to light). It's a clichéd expression, but these cameras were truly built like tanks. I still enjoy shooting with it every now and then. Got it in good condition back in 2007 for $40(*), with a 50mm ƒ1.8 lens, with just a blemish on the focusing screen that really doesn't affect shooting. Cheers! //Rick
(*) Yes, only forty dollars. The seller had probably no idea of what camera it was, and maybe they confused it with one of the cheaper FL bodies Canon produced later.
Thanks for commenting. Yes, great cameras and very cheap when compared to Nikon and Leica!
My 1959 Canonflex is in good condition despite being carried all over the world and subject to all sorts of difficult conditions.Handling it now I had forgotten how heavy it is. My early model was sold in a box-like container plus the tripod mount, flash which attached to end of the body and an excellent light meter . It may not have competed against Nikons product then but in Japan in December 1959 it was top of the pops and duty free, a bargain.
@hermancuttell3516 thanks for sharing!
Great Explanation... Just one question... I have the canonflex RM, and I think they all had the same 50mm lens. My question is why two aperture rings.
It’s the strangest system. One ring is operated by the automatic spot-down mechanism (so you can view at full aperture and the iris will shut down to the required setting when you press the shutter). The other is a manual stop down - presumably to check depth of field (or possibly … I’m only guessing now … to allow use on Canon rangefinder cameras?)
@@WorldwideCameraExchange Thank you... I thought the same... wanted someone else opinion.
This camera became famous in the movie about Fantômas! )
I didn’t know that! Thanks for commenting.
См. "Фотокамера для Фантомаса" )
I have #459 boby, no lens
Worth keeping. The value or early Canon SLRs can only go up!
Excellent video - what a great find to have such a low serial numbered camera and lens. They may have stumbled out the gate but I'd say the Canon F-1 and New F-1 were actually better than the later model F and F2 IMO. For one, every Canon F-1 came with a metered prism - no oversized monster needed to be able to get up and running and as you've pointed out, the Canon breech mount lenses were quicker to change in the field and could be done one-handed in a pinch. Nikon kept buyers constantly upgrading their viewfinders with limited benefits to their users. Once the FD lens mount came along Canon didn't have to modify anything to be able to use their lenses as their line of cameras expanded - no "bunny ears" sticking out.
Thanks for commenting. Canon Vs Nikon … it’s an age old debate! They both have their strengths. I love Canon’s breech lock mount and never understood why it was dropped.
Also Nikon made Canon lenses back then as Canon did not have the facility or know how.
Thanks for comment - it’s always appreciated. At the time many lenses were available for Canon’s rangefinder cameras. But, for whatever reason, they weren’t released with the SLR. Perhaps Canon was waiting for sales volumes to increase which, of course, they never did.
Is that selenium cell light meter part of the camera or an 'add on'.?
The earliest Canon cameras had rails that the Canon meter slides on to.
@@WorldwideCameraExchange So, and add-on then. Thanks for responding.
Yes. Quite a clever design because it couples with the shutter speed dial but, on the down side, they are vulnerable and easily damaged.
It also really interferes with holding the camera and reaching the shutter button. Quite awkward.
Yes!
Nikon got Digital wrong almost going bust, so Canon got one back.
Canon had a slow start but has been reaping its revenge for the last 25 years!