>>3308362>although there's some electronic fuckeryThat's the point. I gave a read to the A-1 service manual out of curiosity, and I saw more shit that need an oscilloscope than I'd be comfortable with. Moreover, swapping parts might not be that easy anyway since the insides are crammed as hell, and if something breaks you might just use the camera as a nice paperweight and get another one considering how cheap they are.
>T70My opinion on the subject is that, if I have to get a film camera that has AE modes, getting one that doesn't feature all three of them (shutter, aperture, and program) isn't worth it. In the FD system only the A-1 and the T90 fulfill this criterion. After all these cameras cost more or less the same amount of money, so I don't get why giving up on features, but again, this is just my opinion,
>more reliable electronicallyTalking about electronics: those particular LCD screen are getting at end of life nowadays, so they're bound to die on you sooner or later, and those are the only interface with the camera, so when the screen is gone your camera is only good for lomography.
>They are also hideously cheap. Depending where you look, you can find them for pretty much the same money. Sure a T70 can be found for less than an A-1, but they're usually around 50 bucks anyway, and it won't be a couple dozen eurodollars to make such a big difference in the grand scheme of things.
>It does sound pretty awful when winding itself though. and it is very 80's in operation and design.For me manual focus film is a way to slow things down and be more involved in the process, and an automatic winder takes away from the experience.
>It definitely wants you to think it's futuristic when using it.>In a way, it was.Unless 80's retrofuturism is your thing, I woudln't want to deal with the design that spawned from it. Sure for the time it was the most advanced thing in the world, but for today's standards it's just obsolete.
