Anyone here collect & use Nikon F's?

Curt · Mar 5, 2008

Not an antique one but an F3hp with a 50mm Micro Nikkor I bought new for BioMed photography. I love the high eyepoint as I wear glasses. Nikon is tops in my book.

Curt

Uncle Bill · Mar 5, 2008

I got a F3HP for Christmas with an AIS 50/1.8 lens, it is a really sweet machine.

arigram · Mar 5, 2008

My first camera was a Nikon F, bought by my father in 1967 in Ethiopia.
My father had the whole set: a large leather case, four lenses, macro bellows
and all. A slight accident that it had in China made me put it aside and then I switched to the Hasselblad I use now.
Fine machine with lots of sentimental value for me.

snegron · Mar 8, 2008

Bob-D659 said:
Don't collect them as such, the 3 F's and a Nikkormat FTn are the only 35mm cameras I own and use, except for a 6x9 Linhof.
Bought the first one used, has the Photomic external meter and a 5.8cm 1.4 lens, and acquired the rest of them over the last few decades.

I've noticed they are attention getters for the last 5 years or so, Last year someone remarked "Film, how quaint" they were carrying some massive digital thing that made a F FTn with a 135 on it look tiny.

I quipped back, "Film is forever, unlike computer data."

He was quite stunned looking after that for a couple of seconds.

I still use film and will as long as I can, having spent almost 40 years in the IT business, it's nice not to have to worry about backing up your holiday/vacation data.

Anyway, they are a nice match to the Durst D659 my son salvaged from a trip to the dumpster a couple of years ago. Man what a nice machine that is. It only had one owner, 40ish years old, lightly used..... A CLA and realign one lens to the autofocus cam and good as new.

Bob

Interesting point about the F being "an attention getter". I was out with the family today at a small tourist place called "Old Town" in Kissimmee, Florida. I took a bag with two cameras:

1) an F with FTN meter head and 50mm 1.4 Nikkor AIS, and

2) a digital D200 with a 28-105 AF-D.

As I was shooting with my "tiny" F (compared to the D200 set up), many people stared, smiled and made comments about the F. After I ran out of film I put my F away and started using my much larger, bulkier, and way more noticeable D200. It was as if I was invisible! Not a stare, not a comment, not a nostalgic smile from anyone! Yes, I agree, the F is an attention getter despite its small size compared to bigger, bulkier SLR's and DSLR's.

p.s. I was only shooting pics of my daughters and some antique cars that were on display, not "street shooting" candids of anyone. The F turned just about as many heads as the antique cars did!

mysticeyes · Mar 9, 2008

F is Forever

I've had two motorized so-called "Apollo" FTN bodies since the early 1980s that are still totally useful today; one of them is mated to an F36 motor that was one of the first ones built in 1959! They were my main cameras until about ten years ago, when I started acquiring F2's. Old Nikons were made to be used, I try to exercise each of mine a few times every year.

snegron · Mar 9, 2008

I took this shot yesterday with my F (FTN metering prism), Nikkor 50mm 1.4 AIS. Funny thing about this is that as I was scanning this image of a Ford Edsel, my Epson 4870 flatbed scanner died. This scanner has been nothing but a headache since I purchased it a few years ago. I wonder if it was the curse of the Edsel that finally did it in?

RoNinHeart · Mar 9, 2008

I don't think it was the Edsel curse. I think the Epson realized that it was a cheap piece of crap compared to the Nikon F and the Edsel and there was no way it could hope to still be in use in 50 years. So it threw in the towel.

I have a soft spot for old cameras and cars.

snegron · Mar 9, 2008

RoNinHeart said:
I don't think it was the Edsel curse. I think the Epson realized that it was a cheap piece of crap compared to the Nikon F and the Edsel and there was no way it could hope to still be in use in 50 years. So it threw in the towel.

I have a soft spot for old cameras and cars.

I don't think my Epson is even 5 years old yet! In dog and computer years that's almost half a century though!

DCB12 · Aug 25, 2014

Just got a new to me F with a 35mm and 50mm period lenses....love this thing. It feels like an extension of my hand.

Peace

Andrew K · Aug 26, 2014

I have a F Photomic - the original one with the external meter. I bought it because it came with both a 24mm/2.8 Nikon lens of the period and cost me $100 AUS....

THen I added a lens that has always fascinated me - a early version of the 45mm GN lens (it's the only Nikon lens that focusses the "correct" way)...

Then I boulght a 80-200 zoom for $30, a Micro Nikor 50mm which has very heavy focussing (I need to strip the helicoid and replace the lube- but for $5 who cares??). Oh, and a period 50mm f 2 for $20...

I've shot a bit with it - mostly with a borrowed Nikon 50/1.2, and the results are excellent....

Theo Sulphate · Aug 26, 2014

The wonderful thing about the F is its simplicity and ruggedness.

After I bought my first Nikon, an F3/T, I became interested in their earlier cameras. Naturally, my mind was filled with visions of the FTN, which was so ubiquitous in news photos from the 1960's. After reading a book about the F and F2, I concluded that the F2 was much better; Nikon having fixed the flaws of their introductory F. After my F2's and F3/T's, I then became interested in the F4 (which I think is Nikon's best camera ever). Still, I couldn't help thinking about the F and that website in Switzerland (http://www.destoutz.ch/nikon-f.html) only increased my interest.

So, last year I finally bought a standard-prism F. It is absolutely wonderful. I love the feel, the sound, the simplicity. I could use this as my only camera.

Like a Ferrari, and much less expensive, everyone should own a Nikon F at least once.

E. von Hoegh · Nov 6, 2014

snegron said:
Anyone here collect and use old Nikon F's? I know that there are many people out there who collect special versions of F bodies produced in the 1960's, but does anyone actually use them on a regular basis?

I have a couple of old F's, but I fell into the "collector's trap" with one of them. I purchased it to use it on a regular basis (Nikon F with standard prism) and it was advertised as being in EX condition. Turns out that it was in near mint condition. It looked so nice that I didn't want to ruin it by using it regularly. I know, it's an F and it was built for abuse, but it looks too pretty to use!

I have actually been thinking about getting a rougher looking F so I won't have any problems taking it everywhere and using it without worrying about messing up its appearance. The other F I have has the Ftn Photomic metering head. The meter still works (I'm using Wein batteries), but I was hoping to get a "lighter" F with the standard prism. I would get another prism, but apparantly the prisms are now selling for more than the F body itself!

Also, anyone using older Nikkor lenses with their old F's?

Nothing is built for abuse.

My main 'working' 35 system was built around the F, I've been using it since about 1995. Along the way I've acquired two Nikkormats, an FT and an FTN- $25 in both bodies - and an F2A with a dinged finder but the body looks like it's spent most of the time in a drawer since 1973, I doubt it's had 50 rolls through it - $100 shipped. Lenses, 20/3.5 28/3.5, 35/2, 50/2 x2, 55/3.5, 105/2.5 all pre AI; the 35/2 went through two pro's before I got it.

E. von Hoegh · Nov 6, 2014

snegron said:
Anyone here collect and use old Nikon F's? I know that there are many people out there who collect special versions of F bodies produced in the 1960's, but does anyone actually use them on a regular basis?

I have a couple of old F's, but I fell into the "collector's trap" with one of them. I purchased it to use it on a regular basis (Nikon F with standard prism) and it was advertised as being in EX condition. Turns out that it was in near mint condition. It looked so nice that I didn't want to ruin it by using it regularly. I know, it's an F and it was built for abuse, but it looks too pretty to use!

I have actually been thinking about getting a rougher looking F so I won't have any problems taking it everywhere and using it without worrying about messing up its appearance. The other F I have has the Ftn Photomic metering head. The meter still works (I'm using Wein batteries), but I was hoping to get a "lighter" F with the standard prism. I would get another prism, but apparantly the prisms are now selling for more than the F body itself!

Also, anyone using older Nikkor lenses with their old F's?

Nothing is built for abuse.

My main 'working' 35 system was built around the F, I've been using it since about 1995. Along the way I've acquired two Nikkormats, an FT and an FTN- $25 in both bodies - and an F2A with a dinged but accurate finder but the body looks like it's spent most of the time in a drawer since 1973, I doubt it's had 50 rolls through it - $100 shipped. Lenses, 20/3.5 28/3.5, 35/2, 50/2 x2, 55/3.5, 105/2.5 all pre AI; the 35/2 went through two pro's before I got it.

MattKing · Nov 6, 2014

I just realized that this thread was started in the "Antiques and Colleting" thread.

In my experience, telling a Nikon F owner that his/her camera is an "Antique" is very, very brave

MontanaJay · Nov 14, 2014

I bought my first F while still in high school in 1968 from a returning Vietnam vet, and added two more in college and during my newspaper career. Later added a Nikkormat FTN and a Nikon FM to go with a passel of lenses, because I couldn't afford the newer Nikons on a journalist's salary.
Can't say I use them much anymore, but they all still work despite living a rough life. They occasionally get use for time exposures of fireworks, lightning and the night sky -- including auroras.
I can still "see" in ASA 400 and can change film without setting the camera back down.

DCB12 · Nov 15, 2014

APUGuser19 said:
The F2 is a better camera. There is no sense in going backwards to an F. It might be "legendary", but the F2 left it to eat its dust.

Do tell.......

DCB12 · Nov 15, 2014

I disagree!

But you are entitled to your opinion.

Peace

Mark Crabtree · Nov 16, 2014

DCB12 said:
I disagree!

But you are entitled to your opinion.

Peace

I doubt you are the only one. The build quality of the F was proven in the field. Stunningly reliable, as was the F2. I love my F's and let a mintish F2 go for cheap here a while back. I never liked the clacky sounding shutter, nor the feel of the camera in general. It certainly had some advantages for a working pro when in came out (hinged back, more convenient motor), and I was happy with them then. But for my shooting today, the F is the slr that makes me want to take pictures. It works great after decades of use, and just feels great. With straight prism that is as heavy a camera as I want to mess with, and I really prefer lighter today.

I turned down a very nice black F2AS at a yard sale recently. I keep thinking about it, but can still remember the shock of picking the thing up. Maybe with a straight prism like my F's, but still not as appealing to me. The F and F2 Photomic heads just don't interest me. An good user F3 might interest me for practical reasons. Those seem to get no love any more, but really were a high point for Nikon.

Theo Sulphate · Nov 16, 2014

APUGuser19 said:
The F2 is a better camera. There is no sense in going backwards to an F. It might be "legendary", but the F2 left it to eat its dust.

Before I bought an F, I already had two F3/T's, *five* F2's, and two F4's. For the longest time I thought the F2 far superior to the F; it certainly does have more features and refinements. Yet, the simplicity and ruggedness of my standard-prism F cannot be matched by my F2's. I'll admit I don't have an F2 with the standard prism, which I think would make it less "clacky", but somehow the F just seems so solid, simple, and appealing. Maybe I don't like the F, F2 Photomic heads either.

Of course, what appeals to me might not appeal to you or others. :- )

Mark Crabtree · Nov 16, 2014

I don't mean to bash the F2. They were rugged workhorse cameras and I don't even recall noticing the weight back when they were current, but it is too easy to misunderstand the build quality of the F, and the rangefinder cameras that preceded it and had much the same feel. When you've seen what they'll do in all kind of conditions over decades of use, without needing service, you will not be fooled by that fact that they feel different than the brick-like solidity of Nikkormats or F2.

If I wanted a Photomic head, I probably would lean toward the F2, but would then probably keep leaning and actually get an F3 if I had to have in camera metering.

Mark Crabtree · Nov 16, 2014

APUGuser19 said:
Nikon did themselves a disservice with the Nikkormat. The "budget amateur" camera beat the F like a drum. Before 1968, the F was disaster in the making. I wonder how many must-have shots were lost with those Tn finders by changing a lens to get the scoop photo, only to have forgotten to index the film speed knob. Having said that, the last year of the F is one I'd love to have. That model was an F2 dressed down.

The vast majority of pros at the time (including me) disagreed with that. I still do.

Steve Smith · Nov 16, 2014

APUGuser19 said:
The F2 is a better camera. There is no sense in going backwards to an F. It might be "legendary", but the F2 left it to eat its dust.

Is that why they carried on making the F until 1973 despite the F2 being introduced in 1971?!!

Steve.

Trask · Nov 16, 2014

FWIW, I just pulled out an early F body (64......) with an F plain prism, a later F (71......) with an F2 plain prism mounted on it, and an F2 with a DP1 metered prism. Each set at 1/125 and no film in the bodies (film will affect the sound of a body, I've found). In my judgment, the two F bodies with plain prisms sounded substantially the same, though the older body had a somewhat darker sound -- perhaps because it recently had a CLA (better foam?). The F2 with meter sounded lighter than either F body -- I can't say it sounds tinny-er, but its tone is higher. A B-flat to the Fs' deeper G. Maybe if the initial Fs sounded like the F2, I'd have that sound in my head as the sound of an F with prism, but the darker F sound is part of what makes an F an F to me.

This all getting too tweaky, like arguing about Sprague capacitors or something...

Steve Smith · Nov 16, 2014

Trask said:
This all getting too tweaky, like arguing about Sprague capacitors or something...

Stop immediately!!!

Steve.

Theo Sulphate · Nov 16, 2014

Trask said:
... The F2 with meter sounded lighter than either F body -- I can't say it sounds tinny-er, but its tone is higher. A B-flat to the Fs' deeper G ... the darker F sound is part of what makes an F an F to me. ...

Bloody hell! Now you've done it! I will have to get my tuner and use it to listen to the shutters of all my cameras. My tuner is set to bias Bb (so that playing C on a tenor sax shows as C and not Bb) - but I'm sure the Nikon F is not a transposing instrument, so I'll set the tuner to C.

My plain-prism F is also from 1971 and I think it's one of the best-sounding cameras I have.

If you're a fanatic about the F, you have to see this website:

http://www.destoutz.ch/nikon_f_typology.html

where even differences in the self-timer lever are noted.

Anyone here collect & use Nikon F's?

Curt

Uncle Bill

arigram

snegron

mysticeyes

snegron

Attachments

RoNinHeart

snegron

DCB12

Andrew K

Theo Sulphate

E. von Hoegh

E. von Hoegh

MattKing

Moderator

MontanaJay

DCB12

DCB12

Mark Crabtree

Theo Sulphate

Mark Crabtree

Mark Crabtree

Steve Smith

Trask

Steve Smith

Theo Sulphate

Anyone here collect & use Nikon F's?

Attachments

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency