F2 or F3 and why?

[reddesert]

Speaking as someone with too many camera systems ... The F2 and F3 are compatible and relatively similar in operation. Keep both and one is the backup for the other. If you need to dispose of something for simplicity or to make room, get rid of something else that isn't compatible whose niche can generally be filled by the F2/F3 (eg some other manual focus SLR).

I feel like the get-rid-of equation is different when these are ~ $200 bodies vs being ~$500-1000 each . That is, if you had too many of some really pricey thing, it makes sense to sell one off. But if you have too many of some moderately priced thing, and you sell one, then if you ever want it again you spend X amount of your time finding it, and how much is that time worth?

 

[BradS]

In the event the end of times come, and parts are no longer available, I would think it would be easier to machine a gear out of a raw piece of metal, than it would be to build a circuit board.

A very commonly held and oft repeated opinion but it is not necessarily true. I suspect that it is commonly thought true because relatively few people have a sufficient background in electrical engineering to even conceive of replicating an electric circuit. That and mechanical parts are more tangible and are easier to understand.

Of course, whether or not one might consider it feasible to do either depends upon what resources are available and a host of other considerations. It boils down to economics.
No electrical engineer is going to devote his time to reverse engineering a circuit board in any film SLR, and design a replacement, and have it manufactured, even though these are all very easy to do, because nobody will ever pay anywhere near enough to make it worth his time.

PS: Your "end of times" scenario is a bit extreme. I think in that case we would all have other, far more pressing issues to be concerned with.

 

[Vincent Peri]

I've had a number of F2A's. Likewise with the F3HP's. I find the F3's are much more reliable.

 

[markjwyatt]

The problem is that all of these are "old" now. Clearly, the F3 was far superior to the F2 when new but today, all we have available to us are old and, obviously, used. At this point in time, it is impossible to make any meaningful blanket statement about which is better (except on purely subjective grounds, like esthetics or ergonomics). Any single individual of one model could be better or worse than any individual of the other model. So, unless you're willing to buy, thoroughly evaluate and repair a fairly large sample (more than ten) of each model...there's no way to know which is "better" (again, based upon purely objective criteria).

Excellent point. More important than the model is the individual condition of a given camera you buy. This is critical today. I picked F2 because of my preference for mechanical cameras due to the fact that I do not want to be dependent on old electronic systems that, for instance, the F3 depends on. Generally I am more interested in the lens than the camera; though camera type (SLR, rangefinder, etc.) is also important.

 

[Paul Howell]

With cameras that rely on boards and chips that going on 30 years, well are chips prone to failure only due to age as opposed to use?

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

Integrated circuits will fail as the dopants in the silicon migrate. The migration rate doubles with every 10 degrees C. It also increases when voltage and current are applied to the circuit. So, yes they fail due to age and to use. If the circuitry is overstressed (badly designed) it will fail early, just like an overstressed mechanism.

On top of that the electronics can fail due to environmental causes like moisture.

The most failure prone components are batteries and the corrosion they cause and electrolytic and tantalum capacitors. Unlike obsolete custom ICs these components can usually be replaced.

The longevity of old solid-state electronics, the ICs and transistors, has surprised everyone in the industry.

A mechanical camera can theoretically be kept going for ever. Broken parts can be fabricated by machining or 3D printing. Eventually you will end up with a camera that is like the proverbial "Grandfather's axe": The handle has been replaced three times and the head twice, but it is still Grandfather's axe.

 

[reddesert]

Integrated circuits are scary to people wary of electronics, because they are complex and often proprietary. However, IME, in consumer devices, the cause of failure is rarely a bad integrated circuit. Solder joints are a common cause of failures, as are switches. That is, some electrical failures are frequently semi-mechanical. Solder joints can fail due to corrosion, temperature cycling, and mechanical stresses, among many causes. So they also fail due both to age and use. Switches, of course, can get dirty or corrode. An un-used camera's electronics might still deteriorate and fail, but proper storage will help mitigate some of the risks.

 

[Huss]

Just keep the one you like. If it breaks, who cares? Get another camera.

 

[Carlini Fotograf]

I also say keep both of them!..

I started in 1983 and I wanted an F3. But couldn't afford one. I ended up getting a
used FM2 with md-11 motordrive and a few years after got a second FM2 with the md-12.
Those cameras went all over the world with me as I did photography in the Music Industry.
By the time I could afford the F3, I liked my FM2's so much that I rather spend the extra money
on lenses.

 

[Swordman]

A very commonly held and oft repeated opinion but it is not necessarily true. I suspect that it is commonly thought true because relatively few people have a sufficient background in electrical engineering to even conceive of replicating an electric circuit. That and mechanical parts are more tangible and are easier to understand.

Of course, whether or not one might consider it feasible to do either depends upon what resources are available and a host of other considerations. It boils down to economics.
No electrical engineer is going to devote his time to reverse engineering a circuit board in any film SLR, and design a replacement, and have it manufactured, even though these are all very easy to do, because nobody will ever pay anywhere near enough to make it worth his time.

PS: Your "end of times" scenario is a bit extreme. I think in that case we would all have other, far more pressing issues to be concerned with.

I'd like to add that there's a camera repair shop in Dubai that fabricates parts if they can't get hold of a replacement part. So it is true that mechanical cameras will outlast electronic ones.

 

[Jon Buffington]

to date, 56% for f2, 25% for f3...19% other nikon. Would love to hear what model and why?

 

[Chan Tran]

The problem is that all of these are "old" now. Clearly, the F3 was far superior to the F2 when new but today, all we have available to us are old and, obviously, used. At this point in time, it is impossible to make any meaningful blanket statement about which is better (except on purely subjective grounds, like esthetics or ergonomics). Any single individual of one model could be better or worse than any individual of the other model. So, unless you're willing to buy, thoroughly evaluate and repair a fairly large sample (more than ten) of each model...there's no way to know which is "better" (again, based upon purely objective criteria).

The F3 wasn't far superior when it was new. I think it's superior today when it's old.

 

[George Mann]

to date, 56% for f2, 25% for f3...19% other nikon. Would love to hear what model and why?

I have and had most of them. My F90x is the best of them overall.

Size, weight, ergonomics, three metering patterns (with exposure lock), fast accurate auto focus (with focus confirmation rangefinder), tough-rugged-dead reliable can do virtually anything camera!

Basically a smaller, lighter F4 with an improved focussing module (powered by AA batteries).

 

[Huss]

I have and had most of them. My F90x is the best of them overall.

Size, weight, ergonomics, three metering patterns (with exposure lock), fast accurate auto focus (with focus confirmation rangefinder), tough-rugged-dead reliable can do virtually anything camera!

Basically a smaller, lighter F4 with an improved focussing module (powered by AA batteries).

Does it have a proper film door latch, or the plastic one of the F100?

 

[Huss]

The F3 wasn't far superior when it was new. I think it's superior today when it's old.

Handling both, the F2 definitely feels old and clunky next to the F3. If the F3 was put back into production today, it would still seem to be a appropriate design.

 

[rgeorge911]

I like the F3HP finder, a lot.

 

[Chan Tran]

Handling both, the F2 definitely feels old and clunky next to the F3. If the F3 was put back into production today, it would still seem to be a appropriate design.

I had the F2AS since 77 and got the F3HP in 82. and when I bought the F3HP I thought it's was not as good as the F2AS but I can get cheap motor drive for it. After a few years the F3HP grew on me and I now like the F3 much more than the F2AS. Reliability was a concerned for the F3 when it was new but it seems no problem now.

 

[George Mann]

Does it have a proper film door latch, or the plastic one of the F100?

Solid metal.

 

[CMoore]

I guess it was the meter read in the finder that i did not like so much in the F3.
I pretty much just shoot manual mode anyway, so i sold the F3.
I am sure i could easily live with it if i had to.
Probably more of a Nostalgia thing for me.
My first foray into photography was the late 1970s..............at THAT Time the F2 was my dream camera. I guess i could never suppress that memory.

 

[Jon Buffington]

I have and had most of them. My F90x is the best of them overall.

Size, weight, ergonomics, three metering patterns (with exposure lock), fast accurate auto focus (with focus confirmation rangefinder), tough-rugged-dead reliable can do virtually anything camera!

Basically a smaller, lighter F4 with an improved focussing module (powered by AA batteries).

I use my n90s the most...such a great camera.

 

[Huss]

Solid metal.

Nice! I wonder why Nikon cheaped out on the F100.

 

[Paul Howell]

I use my n90s the most...such a great camera.

So unless need interchangeable viewfinders or focusing screens skip the F2 and 3 and get another N90 as backup. I know that the military and AP issued N90s, rugged, pretty good AF, fast motor drive, had the features needed by most pro's, likely cost Nikon F4 and F sales. If you want manual focus body, get a FM2 or 3.

 

[George Mann]

Nice! I wonder why Nikon cheaped out on the F100.

Even my N70 had a metal latch where my N6006 did not.

 

[George Mann]

So unless need interchangeable viewfinders or focusing screens skip the F2 and 3 and get another N90 as backup. I know that the military and AP issued N90s, rugged, pretty good AF, fast motor drive, had the features needed by most pro's, likely cost Nikon F4 and F sales. If you want manual focus body, get a FM2 or 3.

The N/F90 uses the same interchangeable screens as the N8008/F801.

My F90x is easier to focus than my manual cameras (focus confirming rangefinder + J type screen).

 

[BradS]

The sole purpose for my F2 is to be able to use the pre-AI lenses that I still have.
Its sentimental value now exceeds its market value too.