Expanding my Nikon System

If you enjoy the FE2..................Ya gotta get an F3HP.One beautiful camera!!

 

You know, I have my F100 in the classifieds...

The F100 is a great camera. I love mine, but I like Canon lenses more. :\

Many, many people speak highly of the F4 and F5.

(I also have my 35mm ƒ/2 in the classifieds, which is a fine lens. Sharp. Not very different or special, though.)

 

There are so many ways to go here, it's not even funny.

The F4/F4S/F4E does seem to work for you though. Not only would it make a good autofocus body for your AF system, it makes a great manual body for your MF system because it supports matrix metering with AI Nikkors. (If I remember correctly it doesn't with AI-converted ones, though.) It's also a pleasure to use. AF is reasonable but not fast, comparable in speed to the F90x in a lot of ways but a little more inelegant (less sophisticated software, more powerful focus motor). It also supports AF-S and is the oldest Nikon to do so (the F90 was the first Nikon to "officially" support it, i.e. it was advertised as a feature and the lenses were intended to be out more or less with the release of the camera, but the engineers put the capability into the F4 too which is great.)

As for other second AF body choices, there are tons. The F100 and F5 come to mind (I have one of each and they are my main AF bodies although the F4 gets a fair bit of use).

For lenses there are a lot of choices. The 50/1.4 is a good one. I have the AF-D version and use it on AF and MF bodies. I also have an AF 85/1.8 that I use on both sets of hardware. The f/2.8 zooms are generally a pleasure to use in manual mode also. It seems wrong to put a 17-35/2.8D on an F3HP, but I do it anyway. The user experience is wonderful.

The 105/2.5 is a legendary Nikon portrait lens and I love mine. Mine is AI. The Nikkor 28s are great. The AI-S is probably the best f/2.8 one and best overall but the AF-D one is a close second, especially if you don't do a lot of close-up work. The manual focus feel is decent enough that you shouldn't hate using it on your FE2. The 28/2 has a great reputation but is pricey.

I don't own a Nikon 24 (I have it in my 17-35) but the Nikkor 24s are great. I don't think there is a bad one, whether it be f/2 or f/2.8.

Don't be too rigid with your gear. Cross it up. Buy AF lenses with the idea that you will use them on your FE2 also. Buy interesting MF lenses that will supplement your AF collection. It is a nice experience using a 105/2.5 on an F4, e.g. I don't even mind using it on the F5. Focusing is not as easy as with a manual body with the proper screen, but I do not find it to be that difficult.

The 55/3.5 Micro is a sleeper lens, probably not quite as good as the f/2.8 but cheap and reliable. The 2.8 is nice because it's fast enough to also use for general photography.

Jim

 

Which 24mm Nikkor is legendary? None that I'm aware of. OTOH, both the 28mm f2 (all versions) and the 28mm f2.8 AIS close focusing lenses are noticeably better than any Nikon 24mm.

As for Macro - if I were you, I'd get a 90mm - probably either the Tamron 90mm f2.5, Tokina 90mm f2.5, or Vivitar Series 1 90mm f2.5. Those lenses are also superb general purpose short telephotos, something you don't seem to have in your arsenal.

If you prefer 55mm, the f3.5 is at least as sharp as the f2.8, costs around 1/2 as much in the market, and doesn't have a problem with oily diaphragm blades like the f2.8 does.

Nikon 50mm f1.4 AI is plenty nice.

As far as your wide angles, I think you'd be happier with fewer, but better lenses. IMHO, a really top notch 28mm, either the f2, or the AIS f2.8, would cover most of the applications where you are also using 24 and 35mm lenses that are merely decent.

And I agree that having one manual film body is a limitation. Nowadays, you can pick up a clean FE or FG for around $50 that will solve that limitation for you. I think you'd be much happier with one of these small bodies than a tank like the F4 - which, IMHO really is not a very good AF camera, but is a great, but huge, pro manual body.

From a cost standpoint, you could get an F100 and an FE for the same cost as an F4, and you'd be getting BOTH a small, compact MF film body, and as good an AF film body as Nikon ever made. If cost were an issue, I'd get another N90s/F90x instead of the F100, again, those can be gotten now for around $50, and they are much better in AF mode than the F4 is.

 

Consider the F-100 as a great addition to the F-90x. Use one for black & white and one for color. The F-100 is lighter than the F-5 and in the performance range of the F-5.

Steve

 

My favorite Nikon wide angle is the 18mm followed by the 24mm. Heck, 28mm is just a wide normal lens .

On the long end, I think the 105mm 2.5 is the best walk around lens made. MY experience, 28 is always to narrow, and 90mm is always to short. I have a 200mm, rarely used and a 300mm used a lot on the long end.

Anyway, choices and opinions are wide on this issue and you can't hardly go wrong with any manual focus Nikkor glass.

Bodies, F3HP and EL2, retired the F's.

Mike

 

Regarding the F4, it's not just the motor speed difference when using the MB-21 vs. the MB-20. It's also ergonomically different. The grip part of the MB-20 is a little larger than the grip part of the MB-21, and the MB-21 also gives a vertical grip with an auxiliary shutter release. I think the added juice from the extra batteries also drives the focus motor harder too (more torque available). I like the MB-20 configuration because it's compact and lighter, but I enjoy the MB-21 (F4s) configuration more because for me it feels better in my hand.

The F4 is a pro level body, so it is better sealed, has a more durable shutter, is extremely solid, and the shutter and mirror are very well damped (vibration free). It inspires confidence, and is the last of the pro film bodies with an analog interface (knobs and dials vs. control wheels). The downside for many people is that all this quality stuff causes the body to be large and heavy. If you're used to handling a Nikon FE, F90x, and D70, you may not like the experience of lugging such a large body. OTOH, you may easily fall in love with its design, performance, and handling. Its AF is usable for most purposes. You'll just have to try it to see if it's as slow as people like to say. It works okay for my needs when I use my AF lenses on it, but that's just me.

You can easily change the focusing screen in the field as long as you're careful about avoiding dusty conditions. I prefer an "E" screen in mine.

My F4 does well pairing with either my D100, or my F2 or F3HP (AF and MF).

--Warren

 

1) Its often called Nikon's best manual camera, the AF isnt great, but the metering is.
2) ABSOLUTELY NOT
3) It uses AAs, so you dont need to use NIMH. The best solution is to use single-use lithium batteries since they are very light and work well.

 

Not enough so you'd notice.

The biggest thing you'll notice with the F4 AF is that it is single point - focuses on one point at center screen. Not a problem once you use the focus lock feature to focus-lock-recompose-shoot.

As far as your lenses, upgrade to Nikon in any focal lengths you like.
Another advantage of the F4 is that it will mount and shoot almost all Nikon lenses built from 1954 till now.

 

I own an F4s and an F90x; In my experience (limited - I've only had the F4 about 3 months, the F90x about 1 month) the F90x gives me more consistent exposures (generally using matrix metering), but is easier to carry about since the F4s is reallly solid/heavy. Having said that, using the F4 is wonderful - good viewfinder, and knobs for everything (actually, the F90x isn't bad in this regard either).

The F4s cost me about twice what the F90x cost me... I'm not sure which I actually prefer. Although the AF on the F90x is better than the f4, I'm not sure I actually like using AF I really need to get a split-image screen, I have yet to find one

[blasphemy, I know, but one of the reasons for me moving to Nikon was so that I can get a digital SLR some time in the future and re-use my lenses; so far it's proving to be quite expensive!]

 

Wishy,

My 80-200/2.8 AF has very well-dampened focus. Try one sometime. (The newer two-touch zoom may not be as pleasant; I've not used one manually.)

My 17-35 has looser focus than true MF Nikons but it's entirely tolerable. The amateur zooms tend to have much looser AF.

I get over a year on a set of AAs on my F4 by the way. Unless you use the camera very heavily, NiMH batteries are not the best choice.

 

Wishy,

Check the top two here: http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/htmls/models/htmls/slr8991.htm

 

The F601m doesn't matrix meter with manual focus lenses, unfortunately. Other than the fact that it has manual focusing aids, there's no advantage to having it over an actual AF F601.

The ENELOOP-style NiMHs are certainly much more useful. I'm tempted to try them myself.

 

Get yourself an F4s, along with a MB20 battery grip to turn your F4s into an F4 when you want to go alittle lighter & shorter. The fact that you can use pretty much any Nikon SLR lens ever made is a big plus, and I really don't find the F4s autofocus all THAT bad. Also, with the F4s you get a focus-aide (arrows & a green in-focus dot) when using manual focus lenses, and that's a big plus. (As a side-note, I use the "K" screen in my F4s, and that give me the "best of both worlds" in both MF and AF.).

As far as another lens goes, the Nikkor 105 f/2.5 lens is one to get as it's not just used for portraits.

Get an F4s...Trust me on this.

 

Yah, the "K" screen can be hard to find (it's very popular, I'm guessing), but the one I really want (the "P" screen) is REALLY hard to find.

And yes, even with the MB20, the F4 is a pretty heavy camera, but even with the MB21, it's still not THAT heavy, as the ergonomics of the camera help with the weight quite a bit.

 

If only a person could buy an MB-20 at a reasonable price. I've been looking for a couple of years but I don't really want to pay $100+ for one.