Advice on Nikon

[Rol_Lei Nut]

For a lot cameras, what you say is true. I would even agree with you when it comes to the lower end Nikon autofocus film bodies. But even though the viewfinders of both the N90s and the F100 are a little lacking when compared to the viewfinders of the F2, and F3, they are still very good and better than the finders on some other manual focus only cameras. Focus confirmation works well under most conditions with these two bodies as well, so it's not a real problem.

My own standards for MF focusing tend to be pretty high...
Leicaflex SL & SL2 are my "gold standard". They easily surpass any Nikon F2 or F3 normal screen and are similar to (but still far better than) the "H" screens.
They also focus easily anywhere on the screen. An AF "focus confirmation" won't.

Yes, I find good finders important (even decisive), so my general opinion is that AF should be left to AF...

 

[fschifano]

I agree with you about the Leica SLR finders. They are fantastically good, the best I've ever seen. But boy, the Leica prices do put me off. They are definitely way out of line with the OP's budget.

 

[GraemeMitchell]

FE2
28mm f/2.8 AIS
50mm f/1.4 AIS
85mm, best you can afford

You can build a career on that right there.

I carry a FE2 w/ either the 28 or a 35 on it daily. Would no trade it for any other 35mm.

 

[Rol_Lei Nut]

I agree with you about the Leica SLR finders. They are fantastically good, the best I've ever seen. But boy, the Leica prices do put me off. They are definitely way out of line with the OP's budget.

TA!

Though the Leica R system's used prices have collapsed since being abandoned a year or so ago....

It is still genrerally more expensive than an equivalent Nikon system, but not that much more.

As always, it depends on what kind of subjects the OP is aiming for.
And what one's priorities are...

 

[keithwms]

Graeme, that's a good kit, indeed. My standard 35mm film kit is only a bit different... it is an FM2N, a 24/2.8, a 50 (1.8 or 1.2 depending on light), and a 105/1.8. When I do carry a zoom, it is an 80-200/2.8. For my taste the 85 is too short for the prime kit- I prefer the 105.

IMHO the $$$/MTF ratio for the Leica R lenses is offscale and not in any way comparable to what the Leica RF lenses deliver. Maybe not so much any more, but if were disappointed with the Nikon lenses, I'd go for the Zeiss ZF primes.

The contax RTS systems interested me greatly for a while. I just couldn't quite make out with the bodies.

 

[Mats_A]

Wow.
I'm still confused but on a higher level.
Let's see. Almost 100% agreement on dumping the 80-200 f4. Ok. It's gone. 85mm or 105 it shall be. Maybe both in time.

Seems like most people suggest an FM over an FE. Me living on the North Pole and all that. Or an F100 or an F3. Desicions, desicions.

From a practical standpoint, what are the biggest differences between F100 and F3. The F3 is of course a pro camera which I suppose means more weight and higher price.

Thanks everybody for your input. Keep them coming.

r

Mats

 

[keithwms]

The F100 is *totally* different from most of the other choices mentioned. It is really more for faster action. As such, it is often called the "backup" for an F5 (or F6). It is the backup camera that became a respected primary camera. Totally different experience than an FE or FM or FM2N. The F100 is well suited to sports and wildlife, birding, that kind of thing. It can definitely be used for slower, more deliberative work, but... that's clearly not what it was built for. Also the VF coverage on the F100 is a wee bit disappointing, and so if full-frame composition is critical (e.g. for slides that will be projected), that can be an issue. I still love it as a camera, I am just saying. Oh, also, the F100 can couple to a good quality vertical grip, which for some cases is absolutely vital. Also, matrix metering is a big deal if you shoot a lot of colour.

So, of the cameras mentioned, the F100 is the odd man out... it is a super camera, but it is entirely different from the FM/FE/FM2N etc. The F3 is a good bit closer to those in spirit than the F100. Really nice piece. Hell they are all nice, get a few and try 'em! The only one I parted with was an F5. I never found use for the 100 hp autofocus.... since I tend to use manual even with AF lenses You could mow your lawn with the F5, if they just made the right attachment.

Find an APUGger who can loan you some bodies, or just tell KEH to send you a few to try out, they probably will help you.

 

[fschifano]

Well, the thing about the F3 is that while it is a completely manual focus body with an excellent viewfinder, the camera is battery dependent, and not only for the metering system. The shutter is electronically controlled, and without the battery you are stuck with a single speed of about 1/80 sec. To be fair, the batteries it uses (a single CR 1/3N or 2 LR 44's) last a long time, but you can't run out and just buy one off the nearest convenience store shelf if you run short. In very cold weather, this can be problem too. There is an accessory remote battery holder for the F3 that allows the use of two AA batteries and can be kept in a warm pocket. The FM's aren't nearly as elegant as the F3's and need no batteries to run as they only power the meter and you can do without that in a pinch. I believe the FE cameras are all also battery dependent.

 

[Brian Legge]

There are lots of valuable opinions, but be sure the kit you are building fits your need. It sounds like you expect the Rollei to be your go-to serious camera and the Nikon your casual/event camera. If that is the case, it may be worth thinking about building a kit aimed at portability and generality. Or you might be interested in autofocus to help with high action situations. Or low light performance may be crucial.

Don't get my wrong here. I adore my F4s and have a 85/1.8 AF mounted on it most of the time. I also have a 50mm macro lens, a 50mm 1.8 and a 35-70mm zoom. Of those, the macro and the zoom are the next most frequently used because they cover different situations. Sure, I'd love a kit of fast primes, but I also shoot situations where distances can change rapidly, etc.

Continuing that line of thought, the F4s isn't exactly the most discrete camera to point at someone. Some of my digital Canon friends get an even harder harder reaction with their 80-200/2.8L lenses - the lenses produce great images and are high utility, but they get different shots than the ones a photographer with a smaller camera.

If I was building a 'family shoot' mess around kit, I'd probably go with a smaller body, a fast lens at good portrait distance, a wide range zoom for times when portability was critical and distances unknown and a flash. Anything left over and I'd throw in a trigger to get the flash off camera.

That said, I also enjoy walking around with a Rolleicord and a compact rangefinder (usually a Canonet 17 or Olympus 35DC). Together, they fit in the same bag as my F4s body.

 

[Chan Tran]

I have used the FE, FM and F3. I would like the F3 the most and although the F3 was most expensive of the three when it was introduced, in the used market today it sometimes can be had for less. The F3 is almost totally battery dependent but that fact doesn't bother me a bit. I have never got caught with dead batteries with the F3 (although my F5 did). Because the F3 is electronic its shutter speed is signifcantly more accurate than that of the FM. I don't know why but checking several FE, their shutter speed aren't any more accurate than the FM although it's electronic.
So my conclusion is that the F3 is best but in some situation its size and weight is not desisable. In such cases I think the FM and the FE are equal so I would buy which ever is less. It seems that the FE can be had for less today although it's more expensive than the FM when they were new.

 

[fotch]

The F3 or the F3HP, 100% view finder. Imagine if you could only see 90% of what you get with your 4x5 view camera, or TLR. OK, I can live with my other Nikon's with smaller views, like the FE, however, first choice for me is my F3.

Then there is mirror lock up. Not everyone needs or appreciates this but I just read that it is still on the F5 and F6 so there is a need for it.

The F100 is a nice camera, however, since my first choice is not auto focus, can wait till I have lots of extra money.

The F3 can also be paired with the motor drive which then puts the expose meter on 8 AA batteries. Or, get an F2.

 

[GraemeMitchell]

From a practical standpoint, what are the biggest differences between F100 and F3. The F3 is of course a pro camera which I suppose means more weight and higher price.

I have two F3hps. One is dead, electronics failed. The other died (same reason) once but I decided to get it repaired.

It's a lot bigger in hand then the FE2 and a lot heavier around the neck. It's clunkier, so to speak. For day to day, I'd take the FE2 anytime. The FE2 is a diminutive and unassuming. It also has a better shutter.

The F3hp is a great camera, does have a better viewfinder, and I'll use it for produced (assistants on sets) shoots w/ a MB-15 battery pack - even over an F5 - b/c w/ MB-15 there's hardly a better feeling or sounding motorized camera.

 

[frank]

As a true casual camera, the FG is just fine. Small and light. The F3 (I have 3 of them) is a more serious camera. Larger and heavier. 28f2.8, 50f1.8 or 1.4, and 105f2.5, and you're set. Add a 35f2 and 85f2, and you're more set.

 

[darkosaric]

The F3 or the F3HP, 100% view finder. Imagine if you could only see 90% of what you get with your 4x5 view camera, or TLR. OK, I can live with my other Nikon's with smaller views, like the FE, however, first choice for me is my F3.

That is why I gave up from FG, FG20 and F801s - I only use F3. I don't like croping and I like to see 100% of view finder / final negative.

 

[Mats_A]

Ok. Thank you all. A lot to ponder.
Knowing me I will most likely end up with a F3 a FM2 and a FE2.

Let's see which is the first once I get the cash.

r

Mats

 

[frank]

With un-filed negative carriers and with commercial colour print processing, the image on the negative is somewhat cropped, so actually the 92% cropped camera viewfinder, shows 100% of the final image on print.

 

[Mats_A]

One model has not come up. Any comments on the Nikon FA?

r

Mats

 

[fotch]

One model has not come up. Any comments on the Nikon FA?

r

Mats

I gave my wife one as a gift and she never used it. I tried it a couple of times, to complex for me, like the FE with more exposure options/features.

 

[Mats_A]

I gave my wife one as a gift and she never used it. I tried it a couple of times, to complex for me, like the FE with more exposure options/features.

You have one more you feel like giving away

r

Mats

 

[frank]

Here's what to do: continue to educate yourself about the various models, features, and prices so you know what's what. Then, let the camera find you. When the opportunity presents itself, you'll be ready, and will recognize it. Lots of cameras have found me this way.

 

[removed-user-1]

The FE2 or FM2 or any of their variants including the FA are all wonderful, but I have to put in a word for the FG as a nice compact manual-focus SLR camera. The FG was my first student camera. It has TTL flash and also was the first Nikon with a full program mode (in addition to aperture-priority and manual). The downside is that it has no DOF preview and no exposure lock (the button that you might think is an AE lock is actually a "backlight compensation button" which adds two stops to the exposure - convenient but limited). Parts are reputedly difficult to find for the FG but then, I suppose that's true for most of these cameras.

If you want an 80-200mm range zoom, don't overlook the Nikon 70-210mm f/4 Series E which is also quite good and may be a little less expensive (since it doesn't say "Nikkor" on the barrel).

 

[fotch]

You have one more you feel like giving away

r

Mats

No, but my wife will give you this one if you come cook, clean house, and pay the bills.

 

[Mats_A]

No, but my wife will give you this one if you come cook, clean house, and pay the bills.

It's a deal! When can I start?

r

Mats

 

[fotch]

It's a deal! When can I start?

r

Mats

Hop on the next flight out, I will pick you up at Chicago O'Hara airport. Will even throw in a lens.

 

[dynachrome]

I agree with Mr. Nut on replacing the zoom with a 105/2.5 and a 200/4. I actually prefer the 200/4 QC to the 200/4 AI. My QC has the factory AI conversion ring. On the short end I think there is too much distance between the 24 and the 50. I used to carry 20, 28 and 35 and skip the 24. I would slot a 35/2 in between the 24 and the 50. My choice for a slower 50 would be either a 50/2 AI or the first version of the 50/1.8 AI. These are both good and are better made than the subsequent slow 50s.

The FG and FG20 are not in the same league as the FE/FM cameras. They have nice features but aren't made nearly as well. I find the FE and FE2 cameras equally nice to use. They are quite sturdy and not too large. If you get an FE2 then an FE might be your second body later. The F3 is heavier and usually more expensive. I saw am FM2N today at a camera show. The seller wanted $250 for it. It's nice to have a camera which can function without a battery but carrying an extra battery is not much of a chore. The FM3A offers the best of both worlds but is very expensive. For me, even though it's part of a different system, the Canon F-1N is a good compromise. If your battery is good it gives you electronically timed speeds. If your battery has to come out you still get 1/90 to 1/2000 mechanically timed.

I also agree that AF cameras like the F100 are different from the FE/FM series and not necessarily as good for manual focusing. I have two N2020s in my collection which I like to use for macro work with manual focusing lenses. Even with the standard screen the center is not blacked out by a split image or microprism focusing aid. Eventually I'll get an E screen for the N2020. The N2020 also has TTL flash capability.