Canon F-1 vs FTb – Should You Go Pro?

Canon F-1 vs FTb – Should You Go Pro?

2400 1350 Chris Cushing

In 1971, a shooter looking for the best Canon camera had two choices: the top level F-1, and its little brother, the FTb QL. I own both, and the two cameras produce images that are indistinguishable from one another. Apart from integrated light meters, both are free of electronics, and can easily be shot without any electronic aids. Both take the same film, and both are fully compatible with the 134 different lenses of the Canon FD family, plus any number of third party lenses.

If I didn’t take notes, I’d have no idea which pictures came from which camera. Why then, are we bothering to compare them?

Put simply, it’s a matter of utility. 40 years on, it’s too easy to look at the top camera in a manufacturer’s range and say “well, that’s the best one.” In this case the price jump from the second-tier camera to the top tier camera is pretty reasonable, so your lizard brain wants you to climb right to the top of the food chain. But is that smart?

Becoming A Major Player

It’s hard to fathom now, but Canon was not always a go-to brand in the professional camera market. With the launch of the F, Nikon became the name to beat in professional grade SLRs. Nikon’s cameras were rugged, adaptable, reliable, and easy to use in a way that few preceding SLRs were. While Canon released quality products,  such as the Canon P and 7, as well as their first SLR the Canonflex, they simply weren’t competing for the pro photog’s dollar. That top tier was occupied almost exclusively by Nikon and Pentax. This all began to change in 1964 with the launch of Canon’s new FL mount.

The FL mount system was a breech-style mount. Like Nikon’s bayonet mount, it allowed for fast, precise lens changes thanks to a silver locking ring. Most FL cameras offered TTL meters with a CDS cell, and stop-down metering. Pretty standard fare for the era, and functionally the cameras were pretty comparable to the Pentax Spotmatic. Capable, but not yet on Nikon’s level for professional shooters.

In 1971 Canon released their first truly pro-spec SLR, the F-1, and with it the FL mount evolved slightly to become the FD mount. The FD mount used an identical mounting ring to the earlier system, but allowed for open aperture metering using a small arm positioned inside the mount ring. This seemingly minor change to the lens construction showed remarkable foresight on the part of Canon engineers, as it would ultimately allow the lens aperture to be controlled by the camera body (a trick that wouldn’t be realized in a Canon SLR until the EF of 1973). For now, shooters were stuck deciding between the F-1 and FTb.

What’s the difference?

In many ways, the two are more alike than they are different. Both have unusually quiet and smooth horizontal shutters; titanium for the F-1 and rubberized silk for the FTb. Both have accurate CdS meters. Both have bright viewfinders. Both are rugged and dependable, and both use Canon’s excellent FD glass. The betting man would look at the lineup, see the F-1’s place at the top, and decide it’s the better of the two.

But right out of the box the FTb has several advantages over the F-1. The FTb is slightly smaller, slightly lighter, and has a built-in hot shoe positioned on top of the pentaprism. The F-1 gets by with PC sync and an easily lost accessory shoe which sits atop the rewinder. If you thought the Olympus OM-1 had an easy shoe to lose, at least that shoe screws in. The F-1’s shoe just clips on, and is about the size of three stacked quarters. It’s easy enough to lose in your bag, to say nothing of use in the field. The FTb gives up just one shutter speed to the F-1, with a maximum speed of 1/1000th rather than 1/2000th .

The F-1 does bring minor advantages – it affords the user a wider range of metering (up to ASA 3200 in late production F-1s vs ASA 1600 for the FTb). And as Canon’s first full-fledged camera system, it launched with a baffling array of accessories. Almost all were incompatible with any other camera then in the range, and were designed with a wide array of uses in mind. The number of available accessories is staggering, and when we’re loading up the F-1 with a bunch of gadgets, these can seriously differentiate the two cameras.

The F-1 had no less than four available prisms, numerous focusing screens which could be interchanged without tools, bulk backs, power winders, motor drives, and provisions for rudimentary automation, including shutter-priority or aperture priority shooting. The novel Booster T finder gave accurate metering down to EV -3.5.

Canon targeted sports shooters with the F-1. In the mid-1980s, the middle of the product cycle for the new F-1, Canon became a major sponsor of Williams F1, and used the mustachioed visages of Keke Rosberg and Nigel Mansell to push their cameras and massive white FD L telephoto lenses. In the 1970s Canon even created a crazy 14FPS motor drive system for photographers at the Olympics. If you can find one of these, and decide you need it, say a quick prayer for your bank account.

Out in the field

Straight out of the box, the two cameras are almost identical. The F-1 is a bit thicker, and quite a bit heavier, but the two cameras share a common control layout. My personal FTb is a later production camera, and is finished in black to match the F-1. Earlier models were a more traditional two-tone silver with more stylized hardware.

The FTb has slightly softer detents on the shutter speed dial than the F-1, making it a bit easier to turn. The F-1 has a round eyecup mount, for which it can be annoying to find correct replacements. The FTb has a square eye cup, which is identical to the one used on modern Canons. Seriously, a removable rubber eyecup from a Canon EOS will snap right on to the FTb.

The FTb also has Canon’s novel “Quick Load” system. Like the Canonet, the QL system allows film to be loaded very quickly, without needing to thread the leader in to the spool. In the FTb(and the preceding FT QL), the system actually works better than it does in the Canonet because the camera is physically larger, and the film wants to lay flatter. I’ve had my FTb for many years, and I’ve loaded film incorrectly exactly one time. The system is almost fool proof, and that one mistake proved that I am a better than average fool.

Once you hold the F-1 to your eye, it starts to become clear where the extra money went during development. The F-1’s standard pentaprism viewfinder is no larger than the FTb’s, but it is brighter. The titanium shutter in the F-1 is substantially quieter than the rubberized silk shutter in its lower-priced sibling. Both shutters are very smooth, and I’ve never had an issue with mirror shake during long exposures with either camera.

Forty years on, most of the available accessories are seriously rare, and can carry a hefty price tag, or an equally heavy weight penalty. If you want a motor drive, prepare to add not only the weight of the drive, but twelve AA batteries to the already hefty camera. Some of the finders are also extremely rare, and can be substantially pricier than a nice F-1 body and a good CLA combined.

Part of the reason I bought an F-1 is because I wear glasses. The addition of Canon’s “Speed Finder” prism for the F-1 was a game changer for me. That little addition means I no longer need to worry about bumping my glasses with the camera, and focusing can be done accurately more than three inches from the finder. I can focus accurately with the camera just above ankle level without laying on the ground with this little clip-in piece.

Shots in the gallery were made on Kodak Ektar and Fuji Velvia.

Is there a winner?

If you aren’t already invested in the Canon FD system, but want to try it out, buy the FTb QL. Seriously, buy it today. If you already have another FD mount camera and want a backup, buy an FTb. It’s a wonderfully utilitarian camera, and combines everything that makes classic Canons great. It also avoids virtually all of the pitfalls that can make them annoying to own (I’m looking squarely at you, AE-1, AV-1 and AT-1).

Mount some of the brand’s excellent S.S.C. or L glass to the FTb, stockpile your favorite film, and you have a camera that will last a lifetime. While it isn’t classically beautiful like an OM-1 or a Nikon F, it is rugged, dependable, and incredibly easy to use.

The F-1 is a wonderful camera, and more capable in some ways than the FTb, but the added cost to buy doesn’t net better results or functionality. If you have some particular need met by one of its accessories or prefer a non-pentaprism finder, the F-1 is delightful. Like the FTb, it’s functional, tough and user-friendly. If you find a screaming deal on an F-1, snap it up, but for most shooters it isn’t worthwhile to seek out the F-1 over its little brother, especially if budget is a concern.

I’ve owned both for many years, and tend to use the two interchangeably. If I toss both in my bag, one isn’t the main or backup camera by default. Generally I’ll choose which one to use first based on which has the lens I need at the moment already mounted. That said, while writing this review I started scouring eBay for a second FTb. I did not look for another F-1.

Of course, more often than not one or the other of these cameras ends up in my bag as a backup for Canon’s very best SLR – the incomparable A-1.

Want your own F-1 or FTb?

Find one on eBay

Find one on Amazon

Find one at our own F Stop Cameras

Follow Casual Photophile on Facebook and Instagram

[Some of the links in this article will direct users to our affiliates at B&H Photo, Amazon, and eBay. By purchasing anything using these links, Casual Photophile may receive a small commission at no additional charge to you. This helps Casual Photophile produce the content we produce. Many thanks for your support.]

Chris Cushing

Chris Cushing is a freelance writer, pedant and photographer who still plays with cars. Based in Albany, New York, he can often be seen aimlessly wandering the Northeast with a camera twice his age slung around his neck.

All stories by:Chris Cushing
  • Very nice comparison. My first slr was the Canon FTb. My friend had the F-1, and, of course, I was a little jealous. The FTb developed “shutter bounce”. I had it repaired by Canon, and then sold it, along with several lenses. I then got a Nikkormat FTn. I think I prefer the Nikkormat to the FTb, but the Canon FTb is a very fine camera. Really regret that I sold it.

  • I have just received my F-1 back from a complete CLA. This review has me even more excited to get out this weekend and shoot it.

    • I really enjoy my F-1, and like I said, if there is some accessory that fulfills one of your needs it stands head and shoulders above the F-1. Plus, if you want automatic advance, the FTb cannot touch the F-1!

  • Hear hear. You’ll save a bundle buying an FTb body over an F-1 and nobody will ever be able to tell from your images.

  • Very good review. Those are some good pictures Chris…

  • Randle P. McMurphy August 28, 2017 at 7:37 am

    It is just a fact – that you can´t see with which camera a picture is made.
    but it is also true that there is sometimes more joy to use a special one !

    I am a Nikon guy and I think after some trips to Canon and Leica this is it
    Owned a FTb and sold it – still can´t let my Canon F1 go don´t ask my why

    The FTb does everything right but for me the F1 just does it better
    For me it´s the first Canon that challenged Nikon for real
    Sure the AE-1 and the T90 kicked ass but that´s a different story……

    • Oh, certainly the F-1 was the first Canon that challenged Nikon at the pro level. Heck, it’s cool to see photos of Formula 1 in the late 1970s and early 1980s and try to spot photographers. If you look in the press pool it’s easy to spot the guys with Canon F-1s and big white Canon Telephotos in a sea of Nikon and Olympus shooters!

      I just find that in most shooting situations now the FTb does nearly everything the F-1 does, and for quite a bit less money. I bought my F-1 for ~$40 in 2012, but the values have long since leapfrogged that. Heck, I was trying to find a Lake Placid edition F-1 last year, and got disheartened when I found that they were trading for $250+!

      Every FTb I’ve ever used has had the circular fresnel style focusing screen. If I found one with the wonderful split-prism screen that my F-1 has… Oh, boy.

  • Just the feel of the F1 is quality. I find it superior to the FTb that in the last version went to using plastic for the gear trains and to me never felt as good or as smooth as the first version

  • Nice review! I have a FTb and a A-1, both in excellent condition. A FD 50mm 1.4 S.S.C and a beautiful FD 55mm f/1.2 chrome-nose. I mainly shoot with a Pentax DSLR but I also use these Canon for 2-3 rolls every year, to keep in touch with my youth. Film is even more expensive than it used to be so each shot requires attention and thought. Digital resolution, cropping, PP and dynamic area of modern sensors can easily make me lazy in a mater of days.

  • Steve Wadidiz Morris December 5, 2017 at 7:35 am

    Excellent review of two excellent cameras. I currently own an F-1 first edition, two FTb, an AE-1, an A-1, an AV-1, three EF and an F-1n coming in today. I’ve tried the New F-1 but didn’t care so much for it. Just to be sure, the Canon EF was introduced in 1973 with FD mount and automatic aperture control, well before the AE-1. It has the same outer-body dimensions as the F-1, but a different basic chassis, with Copal Square shutter. All speeds above 1 second are mechanical. It was the first camera on the market with the much-improved silicon cell metering, has a hot-shoe, 1/125 second flash sync and full information in the viewfinder (not the F-1, FTb nor the AE-1). Longest shutter speed is 30 seconds. It wasn’t cheap and rumors say Canon lost money on every one they sold. Old magazine ads show them selling for the same or more than the F-1. They have a cult following among many–like me–who regard it as the best manual-focus, manual-film-advance SLRs ever made. Beautiful, solid, precision-smooth, factory-specified electronic function down to -20 C, right-sized and refined, elegant simplicity.

  • I bought a Canon F1n (1976 with slight improvements to the first model) secondhand in 1990. I got a few lenses for it – 28-35-50-135-200 and took it to Yugoslavia in 1991 when the fighting broke out. Just the 1 body, a few mercury batteries and 28/35/50 lenses and a Weston Master V meter as a backup. All fitted in a Billingham small bag. Pix widely sold. Still have everything and used camera and 35 today. I now use the Duracell 675 batteries as they are 1.4 v. I tried the alkaline 625 batteries, same shape and size as mercury but the 0.15v difference means the camera underexposes by 1.5 stops with a new cell. I’ve checked the 675 cells in the camera and the meter agrees with my Gossen Lunalite that uses the widely available 9v PP3. I will never part with this kit.

  • I have a FTb QL with lens 50 mm and flash in good condition and would like to sell it. I am in CA what is the best price I clan expected? Thank you for the information.

  • “The FD mount used an identical mounting ring to the earlier system, but allowed for open aperture metering using a small arm positioned inside the mount ring. This seemingly minor change to the lens construction showed remarkable foresight on the part of Canon engineers, as it would ultimately allow the lens aperture to be controlled by the camera body (a trick that wouldn’t be realized in an SLR until the AE-1 of 1976).” WRONG!!!! The first Canon body to realize an ability to control a lens aperture was the Canon EF of 1973. The first SLR that could do that was the Konica Auto Reflex of the mid 60’s, which was the followed by the Autoreflex T, then the T2, and the T3, all of which predate the AE-1. So, by the time the Canon AE-1 came around a camera being able to manipulate and set lens aperture was already old art. Topcon also had that feature before the AE-1, as did Miranda as well. The AE-1’s innovation was electronic control of features that were previously mechanically controlled which, along with the judicious use of plastics, brought down the price for which an auto exposure camera could be bought. The AE-1 also was part of the early days when autowinders started to become ubiquitous. Great marketing also helped the AE-1. BTW, love both the F1 and FTb, but do prefer the F1

    • Hey Nate, Thanks for pointing out where we misspoke here. We’ve corrected the article in reference to the EF’s in-body aperture control.

  • Bernt Sønvisen June 5, 2018 at 7:42 am

    What a nice review! 🙂

  • I owned a Canon Ftbn for about 25 years and when it eventually gave up the ghost it would have cost so much to have it serviced and repaired it was more cost effective to replace it with a good condition F1n, which I did, in fact I now have two of them, they are built like tanks , and will still be taking pictures when most of today’s digital S.L.R.s are inhabiting the land fill.

  • I know this is an old review, but love the photo with the Land Rover Series.

  • Hello, how were those b&w shots of the cameras themselves taken? I like those tones very much.

    • Pretty sure they are just digital photos (made with a Fuji XE of some sort) that were edited in Lightroom. Looks like we lowered, increased contrast, maybe added a little fade. It was a long time ago so it’s tough to recall exactly, but that’s what it looks like to me (I am the one who edited them).

Leave a Reply

Chris Cushing

Chris Cushing is a freelance writer, pedant and photographer who still plays with cars. Based in Albany, New York, he can often be seen aimlessly wandering the Northeast with a camera twice his age slung around his neck.

All stories by:Chris Cushing