|
Articles and Reviews
|
Home >> Photography >> Film Equipment Canon EX Auto
When my wife and I were still dating, I became more seriously involved in photography and bought into the Nikon system. I still had an old Canon FTb body given to me from my father. The FTb was a classic old-style manual body that I never liked due to the awkwardness of it and the slowness of operation, or so I thought. But because I had this old Canon sitting on my shelf, it piqued Su’s memory of some lenses that her brother Ben had at home. The FTb is gone now, sold to a friend to replace his stolen Pentax, so perish the thought of me simply buying old FD lenses to fulfill the void the EX body was bought for. I admit that selling the old FTb was a mistake but hey, I was young and stupid back then. Anyway, Su mentioned that she may have some old lenses for me to use with the Canon and asked if I would be interested. Why of course, said I and very quickly afterwards was I given the two lenses. Sadly though, the lenses Su gave me were of no use with my FTb as they were screw mounts and the FTb was of course of the FD bayonet mount variety. They were of no use to my brother-in-law either as he had bought them at an auction on the mistaken belief that he would be able to utilize them with other cameras, Canon or otherwise. Ben had apparently bought the lenses at a government auction where a wide variety of items are offered for sale. Customs Canada had confiscated the EX lenses Ben bought after the previous owner attempted to smuggle them into the country. I was quite taken with the lenses as I had never encountered screw mount lenses before and couldn’t even fathom what type of Canon body would use such lenses. A query on the rec.photo.equipment.35mm forum got me one response in which the person stated that the Canon EX system was perhaps quaint but the lenses were nothing to write home about. After such words and failure to see any EX bodies in the used bins at the local shops, I shelved the lenses for a couple of years. Every now and then though, I would think, if I could find a body for them I’m going to buy it just so I can at least put the lenses I have to some use. This thought gained further impetus when I got the urge to buy into a manual system for future work in questionable situations as well as for extremely long time exposures without draining batteries. The questionable situations refer to the bad parts of town where a modern day AF camera kit might not make it out still in my grasp. Also inclement weather is another situation where I would like to use a cheap, all manual body. I was contemplating the purchase of a used Nikon body to fill the void in my system but trouble was I couldn’t really decide which old body I wanted to purchase. It actually shouldn’t have been any trouble at all because my criterion only left a few choices for me to pick from. After deciding not to buy a body older then 1970, that really only left the former top model F2 and any of the FM variants such as the original FM to the still current FM2n. These bodies fulfilled the criterion of being fully functional, sans meter, without the need for batteries. Any other old body such as the FE, EM, FG etc., can only function fully with battery power and without juice most of these electronic bodies can only operate at one shutter speed setting. While in Broadway Camera to pick up my Lowepro Reporter 400 bag, I was scanning the used shelves for a Canon EX body, just thinking that if I saw it and if it was selling at a reasonable price, I would go for it. I didn’t see any Nikon FM’s so I wasn’t going to have any conflicts with choices. Henry, my regular contact asked what I was looking for and after hearing Canon EX, he said yes, he did have one. It turned out to be an EX Auto body, which was a slightly updated version of the original EX. The price was reasonable so I bought it. We did have problems trying to figure out how to set the aperture on this particular body and when we finally figured it out we had a chuckle over the EX’s "uniqueness". That’s being polite about it, I actually think the EX bodies and system are a joke and another indicator of Canon’s previous inferiority to Nikon. I haven’t been overly impressed with the overall kit and I don’t think it will remain a part of my collection. Problems with the kit are for the most part minor in nature but they add up to the point that I think there are too many limitations with it to satisfy me in the long term. History The EX system was introduced in October of 1969. It was marketed to low-end amateurs, people who would not have liked or wanted the greater capabilities of the FTb or other more complex and superior bodies. Given its targeted market, the engineers at Canon simplified the system and I think this was the downfall of the kit, as I’ll explain later. In February of 1972 Canon introduced the EX Auto which added a few more features to the body. The original EX had Shutter Priority auto exposure with maximum aperture TTL coupled to a centre-weighted meter. The EX Auto version allowed for automatic correction of a lens’ maximum aperture when attached or rather screwed in. The EX Auto also had a dedicated flash system that provided the shooter with a certain amount of automation from the dedicated Speedlite D. Canon called this flash system the CAT system and claimed easy flash photography in day as well as night. The EX Auto body had a flash distance limiter connected to the focus ring. From what I can see of this ring, when engaged, the ring simply limits the amount of focusing range allowed of the lens to that of the flash power rating. I’m not sure when the EX system was discontinued by Canon but I can see why they did and it reveals Canon’s tendency to abandon its customers and leave them with obsolete and unsupported equipment; read FD mount to EF (EOS) mount. Tech Talk The body is about standard size for a manual style body of the era, circa late 1960s and early 1970s. It has a reassuring amount of weight and my dislike of the EX kit had nothing to do with the build and solidity of the body itself. It harkens back to the days when plastic was not so dominant in camera body and lens construction. In this regard it is little different from my father’s FTb body. The body looks little different from the classic FTb too. This surprised me as I expected a funky type of design to accommodate the screw mount lenses, something akin to a rangefinder. Instead I found a pretty staid and unimaginative look but functional. You have your typical rewind crank on the left side of the top deck. Prism finder in the middle and integrated shutter speed and ISO dial on the right flanked by the winding lever with the shutter release situated in between the two right side controls. The prism finder also has a hotshoe for the Speedlite or other non-dedicated flashes. A standard cable release socket is provided on top of the shutter release button. Looking at the camera body from head on we see a timing lever on the left side of the body. This is the only control on the front side of the camera. A PC socket is located sideways on the base of the lens mount. There is nothing on the backside of the camera save for the obvious hinged camera back door. The bottom of the camera has the standard tripod mount, battery holder and rewind button. The rewind crank on top of the camera is integrated with the power on/off of the camera’s AE metering. It also appears to be the aperture dial for manual exposure control. Think about that one for a bit because it took me a while to figure that one out. A control dial on the base of the rewind crank has symbols for EE, Off, and then 1.8 to 16. The EE is for the auto exposure mode in which the shooter selects the shutter speed and the camera selects the appropriate aperture. Off is self-explanatory and the numbers correspond to the aperture values available. But and this is a big but, I’m not sure what the aperture values really correspond with for exposure control. I assumed that the aperture value dial was for manual exposures but this does not appear to be the case. On my first roll of slide film through the EX Auto, I took a number of shots without the meter being on and used my Sekonic 508 to determine exposure. None of those shots turned out. Only the shots where the camera’s meter was turned on were exposed. So it seems that although the shutter control of the EX Auto is mechanical, the aperture control is electronic. Thus one of my big motivations for getting the EX Auto was thrown out the door, as the camera requires battery power to be fully operational. This battery by the way, is one 1.3-volt HD mercury cell. Further investigation into the workings of the camera left me more puzzled then before, as I could not locate a traditional aperture in body. The lenses are simply the front elements and therefore glass only. The aperture has to reside in the rear lens element assembly but I saw no indication of one being present. In regular manual bodies the aperture is a part of the lens and when coupled to the body it is quite simple and straightforward to check to see the aperture is working properly without sticking. One only has to set the shutter to bulb and then set an aperture value to see it working. I could not do this type of test with the Canon EX Auto to discern an aperture. But obviously an aperture of some sort is in the body and it appears to work only with the Auto Exposure mode. Looking through the viewfinder reveals a fairly sparse amount of info. A very different view of things from the multi-informational viewfinders of today’s hi-tech autofocus cameras. On the right side of the viewfinder an aperture value read out is located with a needle utilized for indicating the aperture chosen. When in EE mode the needle moves according to the aperture values computed by the built in meter. The aperture values start with 1.8 at the bottom and max out at 16 at the top. Red sections indicate under and over exposure on the bar. The shutter dial has settings for Bulb and shutter speed values from 1/8 to 1/500 in full stop increments. Flash sync speed is 1/60 or slower, fairly common among manual bodies of this time period. Its companion ISO dial allows for film speed settings from ISO 25 to ISO 800. All in all we can see that the EX body, though solid and well built, is very basic and limited in functions and ability. I get the image of a modern day point and shoot camera repackaged into a manual style body but with none of the typical manual body’s technical virtues. If I remember correctly my father’s FTb had a shutter speed range of 1 second to 1/1000 of a second with a less limited ISO range as well. The limitations of the EX Auto body are basically what is been sinking this kit for me. Doing a trial run through with some Fuji Provia loaded in for snap shooting in various situations and lighting conditions revealed how little I could do with the kit without some adaptation. Add to that the very limited range of lenses and we have a kit that a serious photographer could utilize in some situations but certainly not all that a more qualified manual body could. And it is in those situations that the EX body cannot handle that are the most interesting or challenging for a photographer. The Lenses The most interesting part of the kit. The lenses for the EX system are comprised of two separate parts that must come together to complete the optical formula. There are four lenses available in the EX system, the standard 50mm f/1.8, a 35mm wide-angle f/3.5, a 95mm f/3.5, and a 125mm f/3.5. I had the 35mm and 125mm lenses to start with and the 50mm came with the EX Auto body I bought. I have not seen the 95mm and given the scarcity of EX pieces, I don’t expect to see one anytime soon. The rear elements of each of these lenses are standardized as they are built into the body itself. This is the weird or unique element to the EX system. The four lenses mentioned above are actually just the front elements. Screw a lens onto the body’s rear elements and you complete the optical formula and obtain the focal length of the lens. The 50mm is very small as it only a single element with the other two elements being a part of the body. The 35mm lens is quite large in comparison and the 125mm lens is very large in its own right, as the filter threads are 72mm sized. The 35mm and 50mm have filter threads that are 48mm. The 125mm came with its own lens hood that could be stored reversed onto the lens. It needs to be stored this way as the lens cap is a slip on type that would interfere with the lens hood so that the hood has to be slipped on from the screw mount end for storage. The three lenses I have on hand are another harbinger of how things were in the past. The lenses are made out of metal and as small as the 35mm lens is it still has enough weight to compare well to my Nikkor 50mm f/1.8. Keep in mind that the 35mm EX lens is only the front element part. If the whole 35mm lens was compared the diminutive Canon would win out in heft and would be as heavy as my Nikkor 24mm f/2.8. When the 125mm lens is screwed onto the EX body the combination has a very nice feel to it in terms of weight distribution and hand hold-ability. The solidness is very apparent. I should note that there is plastic utilized on the body but it is only as a front cover plate under a metal chassis. This plastic takes the form of the black wrap around portion of the body that also encompasses the camera back door. It is textured for better grip. Otherwise, aluminum is used for the "chrome" look of the top and bottom plates of the body. This is the classic look that today’s modern day AF bodies are resorting to for marketing purposes. This retro look is only available on the low-end bodies such as the Canon Elan and Rebel series, Minolta XTsi, Pentax ZX-50, and the Nikon F60. Personally I don’t care for the retro look, way too consumer fashionable. Give me the mean, bad ass, all black, pro-oriented bodies any day. Use The EX Auto body and the three lenses I have worked fairly well. The screw mount nature of the lenses added a bit of slowness to lens changes compared to the more typical bayonet mounted systems. Manual type bodies all seem to work in more or less the same fashion so there isn’t too much to comment for hands on feel. It seemed all right for the most part and where the kit falls down is in terms of technical and feature omissions. The basic kit with the 50mm lens is quite functional as far as size and heft is concerned. This should be the case since the body structure is really meant for the 50mm lens. As mentioned previously two lens elements are built into the body itself. These elements stick out about one inch from the body proper and the focusing ring is a part of this two-lens element structure. The focus ring has the standard distance information in feet and metres and there is even a depth of field scale at the very base of the built in structure closest to the body. Screw in the single 50mm front lens piece and a very compact lens is had, screw in the other lenses and the shooter has do a minor set up to align the lenses properly for focusing distance information. The other lenses have their own distance information stamped on their exterior. This information rests on a ring that can be rotated around completely. After screwing on one of these front elements the shooter must ensure that the lens’ infinity marker matches the infinity marker of the body’s focusing ring. Only when the two infinity markers are aligned correctly can the proper distance information be had. It’s not a big bother at all but Canon should have made some provision to lock the lens’ distance ring in place after alignment because in the course of use this ring can be rotated out of alignment. Another caveat with this setup is the amount of rotation required going from the closest focusing distance to infinity. The rotation required with the 35mm and 125mm lenses is about 240 degrees (2/3) of a full 360-degree rotation. In comparison, my Nikkor 50mm only requires about 120 degrees of rotation and Ben’s Yashica 50mm is just over 180 degrees. Of course in terms of manual focus feel, the Canon and Yashica are much more damped then the autofocus Nikkor (which would account for the far shorter rotation of the Nikkor – to accommodate the screw type autofocus system of Nikon). One nice feature of the Canon is the bright and large magnification of the viewfinder. Brief comparisons to the Nikon F70 with 50mm 1.8 lens and Yashica FX-3 and 50mm 1.9 lens were interesting. I recall Herbert Keppler of Popular Photography complaining about the steady decrease in magnification and brightness of today’s autofocus viewfinders vis a vis yesterday’s manual focus viewfinders. With that article in mind I expected to see differences between the Canon EX and Nikon F70 and I got them. Yes indeed the F70’s viewfinder was dimmer and smaller in magnification compared to the Canon EX. The F70 probably has the typical 0.73 magnification of current bodies whereas the Canon EX has 0.90 magnification. The Yashica FX-3 also had better magnification then the F70. Dimness wise I estimate a loss of about a stop of light from the F70’s viewfinder compared to the Canon EX (based upon a very informal test with a Kodak grey card and my Sekonic 508 meter in spot meter mode and taking measurements from the camera’s viewfinder window). Surprisingly the Yashica FX-3 was only as bright as the F70. Only the central portion of the Yashica’s viewfinder, where the split rangefinder is located is as bright as the Canon’s whole viewfinder, the rest of the Yashica’s viewfinder is dim. It was a lesson well learned and I have much more empathy for the old timers with tired old eyes who don’t like the dim views of today’s camera bodies but autofocus makes up for that tremendously. But again, from Mr. Keppler’s research, autofocus is not as unfallible as we would like to think. A recent article suggests that autofocus technology may not be as precise as good old fashioned manual focusing with the eye for stationary subjects. However, moving targets throws that argument out the door. The EX Auto body in use was in some ways satisfying. I wouldn’t have thought that I would enjoy the procedures involved in manual operation bodies but I got a kick out of the smooth winding lever on the EX. Another sign that the past was of better build quality is the all metal winding lever. No plastic tips or parts just solid metal that my thumb felt at home with. Film winding can be quite quick once you get the feel for it and for general photography a motor drive from a modern body though a convenience, wasn’t missed as much as I thought (although for rewinding film, I love the motor drive). It was, in basic operation, a pleasure to use but… Downsides There are a few and they may be enough to kill any thoughts of getting an old EX kit for yourself. The viewfinder is bright with good magnification but it utilizes a microprism rangefinder focusing aid only, over top a fresnel matte screen. Having gotten use to the split image circle of my Bronica SQ-Ai, I’ve come to appreciate this type of focusing method and found the microprism only of the Canon Ex to be disconcerting. For stationary subjects in bright light and with good contrast it is adequate but in low light with low contrast subjects the focusing can be a bear. Note too that the rest of the viewfinder is not much assistance for focusing either. That was something else to get use too. With most other cameras I’ve come across, when manual focusing, you can see the entire viewfinder fall in and out of focus very easily with the central microprism or split image finder providing very fine focusing. If a shooter has good eyes then focusing aids may not even be needed. Even with the generally dimmer view of my AF Nikon bodies, I can easily focus accurately in good light just by the viewfinder alone (I have too since the AF bodies have no manual focusing aids except for the electronic rangefinder). The Yashica FX-3 works this way too. The Canon EX works in this way as well BUT very subtly. When checking out the EX kit, I had to look very, very closely at the whole viewfinder to detect any changes in focusing beyond the central microprism. With the 125mm lens screwed on the effect is almost negligible. So much so that when I went to Leo’s Camera wo have the camera body tested for accuracy, the sales guy I was talking too was as surprised as I was at the viewfinder. We both thought of it as being more like a rangefinder type of camera then a SLR. This type of focusing means that the shooter has to really centralize his subject for focusing all the time instead of being able to go by general viewfinder focusing. One could also go by distance focusing or scale as it is known but given how much rotation the lenses have go through and how easily the distance barrel on the front elements can be thrown off line this can also be problematic. The camera body features or lack of are also a source of annoyance. I’m appalled that Canon engineers from the early 1970s could be so cavalier with what I would consider to be essential basics for a manual body. The biggest curse I have for them is the limited shutter speed range of 1/8 of a second to 1/500 of a second. Surely to God they could have given the consumer that extra stop of speed on the high end but to cut the steps on the slow end is mind boggling. If I require a slower speed then 1/8 of a second, how on earth am I suppose to accurately time the speeds in between to 1 second? That’s two stops in the shutter range that are gone before a shooter can utilize the bulb mode and then start timing accurately in full second steps. There is also no wide selection of lenses available for the EX system. I already have three of the four made, missing only the 95mm f/3.5. The 95mm would be a good lens to have to fill the void in between the 50mm and 125mm. But my biggest concern with the lenses is the lack of anything wider then the 35mm or longer then 125mm. I, like many other photographers don’t use the 50mm perspective very much except in low light, handholding situations. I tend to favour focal length extremes of either wide or very long, neither of which are catered to by the EX system. A FD to EX type of adapter could have ameliorated such problems and voids but given the unique nature of the EX body I understand why none would have been produced. What we are left with is a very, very basic body that although fairly well built, is devoid of the technical ability that serious photographers would desire. Couple that with the limited range of lenses and we have a kit wholly suited for the very basic amateur/consumer photographer. The Rebel G of the 1970s but even more useless. Put all of the above problems together and add the necessity of battery operation to even work the camera and I have difficulty trying to find a place for the EX Auto in my camera bag. Okay, but did it at least take decent photos? After familiarizing myself with the EX Auto kit and then finally running a roll of slide film through it, I can offer this on picture taking ability. As far as accuracy was concerned the EX Auto body I bought was still within acceptable norms. The diagnostic check at Leo’s revealed that the meter was off by a slight margin, meaning that at reference ISO 100, it would be in the IS0 80 range. Shutter speeds were accurate for the most part but a bit slow at 1/60 of a second. This can be brought back to speed through regular use given the mechanical nature of the shutter. I’m sure many photographers can attest to shutter speed inaccuracies from old manual bodies so this was not a big concern. Overall the body was in fine shape given its near three-decade age. The inside of the film chamber was very clean and the cloth shutter was still in excellent condition. I wouldn’t have expected any problems in general use and I didn’t experience any. Aside from the problem of not having the first third of my first roll of film being exposed and some inadvertent losses due to early camera door openings (the joys of using a manual body with no film window to indicate a roll of film in the camera except for the dim matter in between your head) the camera works. I still don’t understand the way the aperture works in this system but it appears to function properly given the shots I took. I used the centre-weighted meter for the most part and it worked quite well. I wasn’t in too many difficult situations exposure wise but common sense and bracketing should keep you out of trouble. Unfortunately unless you want to play with the film speed dial, bracketing can only be done in full stop increments. The lenses seem pretty decent too. Nice color and contrast and good sharpness were had from all three lenses on hand. I’m not planning on enlarging any images I shot so I can’t speak of how well the lenses would hold up under greater and more critical scrutiny. Given the low cost nature of the EX system, I don’t imagine the lenses to be top performers but the use of a tripod, cable release and setting the correct shutter speed for a decent amount of stopping down should at least provide some measure of quality. Conclusion Even with some of its fine points, I don’t like this kit and I will be returning the body for a refund and I will also attempt to sell off the 35mm and 125mm lenses in my possession. I wanted to like this kit but I feel that its limitations are too much for me to warrant keeping it. April 2003 - This review was written some years ago and I no longer have the 35mm and 125mm lenses. If the camera had a better selection of lenses that I could eventually buy then maybe I would keep it. But Even if I could only have the three lenses I have now, I could live with the kit if the body were more functional as in full manual exposure control without battery power. Unfortunately neither is the case and the shortsightedness of the Canon engineers to strip the shutter speed capability of the camera is another con against it. Any of the three points by themselves is not overly critical but put them all together and it makes for a kit that I can’t live with. I wanted a completely manual body as my first priority but I like automation to a certain degree and given the relative affordability of button cell batteries, it would not have been too much of a financial drain if I were to do a few long time exposures here and there. I like the 35mm lens perspective much better then the 50mm lens. It gets a wider perspective but without as much of the lateral distortion inherent of wider angle lenses. It means being able to take group photos without worrying about the people at the edges of the frame becoming unnaturally fatter. But mostly what I can’t live with is a body that restricts my ability to use fast film at wide apertures outdoors and also restricts me at the other end of the shutter spectrum as well. I still can’t fathom how Canon could lop off three stops at the slow end of the dial in between 1/8 of a second and Bulb. I know I stated the desire for a walk around camera in certain "bad" areas of town at the beginning of this report and this would not require slower shutter speeds then 1/30. But even though a camera is bought for only limited duty, it should be capable of being called upon for other types of shoots. The Canon EX Auto could probably fulfill 67% of my needs but it is the last 33% that I find most interesting photographically.
Some readers of this review wished to clarify some mistakes or misconceptions I had with the EX Auto. Below are those emails outlining where I might have gone wrong with my assumptions.
Link to a gallery page of images taken with the EX Auto by another user
|
|
Correspondence & About this website Copyright © 1998-2008 Edwin Leong |
|
 |
|
Why
on earth would I want to buy into such a basic system as the Canon
EX Auto and its attendant lenses? Two free lenses that’s why. 
On the left hand side, the rewind crank and the AE On /Off dial.
The red EE symbol is meter on. Notice the alignment of the two infinity
symbols for the lens and body. You can just see the lens' infinity
symbol in front of the white dot. This white dot is the point where
the front elements screw onto the body. Two rear elements are behind
it and are a part of the body. 
