This article is within the scope of WikiProject Photography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of photography on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Brands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
I'd like to make the observation that contrary to the reports in this article MY A-1 has been very reliable in the 23 years that I've owned it using it primarily for (rock) concert photography in low-light, high vibration, high humidity environments. YMMV of course. Megamanic 09:01, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
This article seems to be really heavy on tyring to prop up Nikon and put down Canon. While I think it's important that other manufacutrers are broght in to discuss the motivation of Canon to create the A-1, it seems that some stuff, like where the part of the article states that Nikons has better build quality, and that Nikon has better tolerances and QC, are subjective to the person using the camera, and based soley on opinion, not fact. Much of this article seems to be putting down Canon as much as possible, which doesn't give a balenced point of view about this camera. Based on repair logs that I have seen from repair shops, the A-1 is not particularly more or less reliable than any other camera. [[User:Drib9|Drib9] 15 July 2006
in fact the A1 was not the first to offer a fully automatic exposure mode, the first one was the minolta XD7 (named XD11 in the US), introduced a year earlier (77). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Seneka (talk • contribs) 14:26, 1 February 2014 (UTC)