F2 or F3 and why?

[Jon Buffington]

I think the beast of a camera the Minolta XK I have could literally drive nails. It dwarfs the f2 and f3 in size and weight, lol!

But I diverge from my topic at hand...I just loaded a roll of tmy-2 in...my nikon n90s (though the f3 is next to it loaded with color film) due to convenience of it and the 28-85 lens. I really need to load the f2 and f3 up with color and B&W, take them both out for the day side by side and see which one sits right with me. I do love the f3, but worry about the LCD readout in the viewfiender and that I can't use my non-ai lenses. The f2 wins for me in that category. Maybe I should keep both....???

Edit to add: F2 pulling away from f3 in the poll, 27 to 10 in votes.

 

[abruzzi]

My first Nikon was the Nikkorex F made by Mamiya and Copal, which actually seems to be the ancestor of the FT line on both a conceptual level and in terms of the actual styling. Ever come across one?

I’ve never seen in in real life, just an occasional listing on KEH. I heard less than great things about them. I also have a Nikkormat FS, which is pretty cool—basically a FT without a meter. The uncluttered viewfinder is very nice. It makes me want a meterless prism for my F2s.

 

[BrianShaw]

This is an interesting thread to read. The last time I was involved in this discussion was 1981… when I bought my F3. My buddy at work told me it was a bad decision and I should get a F2 instead. I’m still using it.

 

[film_man]

I do not own, or know much about a "Modern Day" 35mm SLR.
Why is it no longer (or maybe it is) a concern to be able to change the Focus Screens.?
How common was it, for the majority of 35mm users, to change the screens circa 1975.?

Because the cheaper modern AF cameras are not compatible with manual lenses (for cheaper construction) and the point of an AF camera is to have AF. As such the point of the viewfinder is to give an unobstructive view, ie plain matte screen.

The expensive ones still let you change screens. The F5 and EOS 1/3 for example. In fact, the Ec-S screen for the Canon 1/1N/1V/3 is brilliant, you can have a great manual focus camera with it and a fully automatic one. The F5 stock screen is very good too for manual focus.

 

[Huss]

They had a good number of them destroyed too but it's their job and they could afford it. The F2AS cost me $550 ($700 with the 50mm f/1.4 lens) in 1977 and I was making $5 an hour I wouldn't want to use it to drive nail.

The only camera out there that is tough like a hockey puck and can drive nails is the Nikonos V. I heavily fell off my skateboard one time while using it, and as I faceplanted on the concrete I watched it slide and bounce down the street - just like a hockey puck!. Apart from a few scratches it was totally fine. My F2 (or pretty much any other camera) would have exploded into a million pieces. Or at least some big chunks.

The Nikonos V is actually a superb camera on land.

 

[CMoore]

Because the cheaper modern AF cameras are not compatible with manual lenses (for cheaper construction) and the point of an AF camera is to have AF. As such the point of the viewfinder is to give an unobstructive view, ie plain matte screen.

The expensive ones still let you change screens. The F5 and EOS 1/3 for example. In fact, the Ec-S screen for the Canon 1/1N/1V/3 is brilliant, you can have a great manual focus camera with it and a fully automatic one. The F5 stock screen is very good too for manual focus.

Yeah.......Right
I do not own a modern camera, so i forget that most people are letting the AF do its job. And i am sure it does a great job.
Makes Sense.
Thank You

 

[Paul Howell]

Nikon made very strong camera's this an image of Don McCullin's F that took a bullet, he says it saved his life, but the camera was not functional and he had to use a back up camera, forget if it as second Nikon or a Leica. I did know another UPI PJ who's F was run over by a tank in a training exercise and not only survived was more or less functional although he had to change lens.

 

[Chan Tran]

The only camera out there that is tough like a hockey puck and can drive nails is the Nikonos V. I heavily fell off my skateboard one time while using it, and as I faceplanted on the concrete I watched it slide and bounce down the street - just like a hockey puck!. Apart from a few scratches it was totally fine. My F2 (or pretty much any other camera) would have exploded into a million pieces. Or at least some big chunks.

The Nikonos V is actually a superb camera on land.

I had a couple of the Nikonos V's one is olive and one is orange. I am no diver but they are great for the rain.

 

[RLangham]

I’ve never seen in in real life, just an occasional listing on KEH. I heard less than great things about them. I also have a Nikkormat FS, which is pretty cool—basically a FT without a meter. The uncluttered viewfinder is very nice. It makes me want a meterless prism for my F2s.

They're not so bad, just staggeringly large and incredibly basic, aside from the then-avant garde copal square shutter. Often, they have or had a Nikkor-S f/2 with them, which is the more rare predecessor to the Nikkor-H, and a very, very good lens which is one of my favorites, with some of my Steinheils and Minolta Rokkors. The meter is external and selenium-powered, but reads the shutter speed and aperture to give some version of an match-needle display on it--I don't have the meter.

Not something to seek out, but a solid all-manual body that can mount a huge subset of nikon lenses, if you come across it. (Practically everything but G-series lenses without manual controls).

 

[Jon Buffington]

So just finished up a roll in the f3, shooting some flowers in our yard. The lcd screen was hard to read in the late summer sun (glare coming in the side of the viewfinder between my eye and the finder), viewfinder not the brightest (I was using a slow lens so didn't help things). Anyways, loaded up a roll in the f2 and went back out to shoot a few others. The screen was brighter making it easier to focus, the simple meter needle made it easier to read proper exposure and the confident shutter release just felt better. I immediately noticed a visceral and tactile difference between the two with my natural gravitation towards the f2. I see in the poll that currently it is a 3:1 preference for the f2 over the f3. I am going to shoot these cameras side by side over the next few weeks and get a real feeling but as of now, the f2 feels so nice. I do prefer aperture priority shooting (positive for the f3) but the lcd just is not the best.

I appreciate everyone's personal experience in this thread. I also notice that an equal # voted for another nikon camera (about the same # as voted for the f3) and I am interested in hearing why.

 

[Jon Buffington]

Never tried the F2 but that LCD on the F3 is a real bummer.

It is. I mean, it works fine but if it is too dark, can't see. Too bright outside, can't see. Black numbers on a gray background just is not the best. If it was illuminated or something but the way it is, just not a fan.

 

[Bronson Dugnutt]

Not something to seek out, but a solid all-manual body that can mount a huge subset of nikon lenses, if you come across it. (Practically everything but G-series lenses without manual controls).

All the FX G series lenses have a mechanical focus ring so they'll mount and focus at their widest aperture, but of course stop down to their minimum aperture when actuating the shutter. If you're a savage you can adjust and affix the mechanical aperture lever on the back of the lens before mounting to 'manually' specify the aperture to use for exposure. NOT a recommended practice for any lens that wasn't salvaged from the bottom of the sea however.

Then there are a subset of G series lenses without a mechanical aperture lever (e.g. Nikkor 200-500 f5.6) which also mount and focus at their widest aperture but remain wide open when exposing the frame. A much more acceptable compromise when combining tech so far removed. (Edit: these are also, confusingly, referred to as 'E-type' due to the electronic, rather than mechanical, aperture control)

FG-20 with E series glass (compact, AE, stepless shutter!) and the more 'serious' FM2 for use with proper nikkor glass would be my votes.

 

[RLangham]

All the FX G series lenses have a mechanical focus ring so they'll mount and focus at their widest aperture, but of course stop down to their minimum aperture when actuating the shutter. If you're a savage you can adjust and affix the mechanical aperture lever on the back of the lens before mounting to 'manually' specify the aperture to use for exposure. NOT a recommended practice for any lens that wasn't salvaged from the bottom of the sea however.

Then there are a subset of G series lenses without a mechanical aperture lever (e.g. Nikkor 200-500 f5.6) which also mount and focus at their widest aperture but remain wide open when exposing the frame. A much more acceptable compromise when combining tech so far removed. (Edit: these are also, confusingly, referred to as 'E-type' due to the electronic, rather than mechanical, aperture control)

FG-20 with E series glass (compact, AE, stepless shutter!) and the more 'serious' FM2 for use with proper nikkor glass would be my votes.

Well, sure, but I'm a pre-AI person, so would would the FM2 even mount my glass without a destructive, irreversible conversion? I'd much rather a pre-AI camera like my F2SB or even a Nikkormat of any kind that can mount both pre-AI and AI with added bunny ears.

There's a reason people still adore the SB with it's fast, well-engineered meter and ability to use a wide variety of lenses, and the Nikkormats that come so highly recommended as people's first serious film camera even today. Pre-AI glass has a lot of character owing to engineering imperfections from a pre-computer era, but it's also fine glass with overall good performance, a compromise that I really like

 

[BrianShaw]

It is. I mean, it works fine but if it is too dark, can't see. Too bright outside, can't see. Black numbers on a gray background just is not the best. If it was illuminated or something but the way it is, just not a fan.

You could always try pushing the red button.

 

[Huss]

It is. I mean, it works fine but if it is too dark, can't see. Too bright outside, can't see. Black numbers on a gray background just is not the best. If it was illuminated or something but the way it is, just not a fan.

Never had an issue seeing the digits in 'too bright'.
Too dark - the led illuminator is finicky to use so not ideal.

 

[Jon Buffington]

Never had an issue seeing the digits in 'too bright'.
Too dark - the led illuminator is finicky to use so not ideal.

lol, I didn't explain myself very well. So bright late afternoon sun, I am shooting with it 45 degrees to my left (I am a left eye shooter) and the sun coming in the gap between my eye and the veiwfinder, the glare prevents me from seeing the lcd. I could probably put on a rubber eye cup as I have several sitting around and it might solve the issue. However, it was not an issue with the f2 needle doing the exact same thing..

 

[cdowell]

Come to think of it, I still have this one* ready to go out the door if anyone here is interested putting together a matching set. Knock off the lens and I'll ship US for $195 (obo). I love the solid clunk of the shutter of the F3, but haven't shot any 35mm cameras in a long time (and have inherited two to go with my trusty FG! Not to mention my Argus with the flipped lens element).

*
https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/for-sale-nikon-f3hp-50mm-f-1-4-non-ai-lens-or-trade.171536/

 

[BradS]

.... The F2 was kept in production well after the F3 was introduced ...

Although the F2 was still available on store shelves for a while after the F3 came to market it was officially discontinued about the same time that the F3 was released. According to Nikon, The F3 was released in March 1980 and the F2 was discontinued in June 1980.

https://imaging.nikon.com/history/chronicle/history-f3/

 

[Huss]

The F3 was kept in production all the way through the F4's run, and into the production run of the F5.

So obviously F3 is the best!

 

[BradS]

I’ve always wanted but never owned an F3.
Here's my favorite F2….

 

[CMoore]

I’ve always wanted but never owned an F3.
Here's my favorite F2….

View attachment 280277

Is that the F2S.?

 

[BradS]

Is that the F2S.?

Close. It is the F2SB. It's actually hard to tell from that angle. The F2S (DP-2) has a funny bump on the top of the finder otherwise they do look kinda the same. Here’s another photo that makes it more clear.

 

[CMoore]

Close. It is the F2SB. It's actually hard to tell from that angle. The F2S (DP-2) has a funny bump on the top of the finder otherwise they do look kinda the same. Here’s another photo that makes it more clear.

View attachment 280286

Yeah, i have a pair of F2S, but i have not shot them in almost 2 years.
I have been shooting the Canon F1-New.

The LED read-out on the top is a lot different on the S Vs SB.
I have never held the SB. The only criticism i have ever really heard is that some people do not like the meter as much...........because it is "Harder To See".
Maybe the 3 LED in the SB are more difficult (for some people) to see than the 2 LED in the F2S.?
Have you used, or at least looked through both.?

 

[BradS]

….
I have never held the SB. The only criticism i have ever really heard is that some people do not like the meter as much...........because it is "Harder To See".
Maybe the 3 LED in the SB are more difficult (for some people) to see than the 2 LED in the F2S.?
Have you used, or at least looked through both.?

Funny…I’ve never seen an F2S in person. I cannot image anyone having trouble seeing the LEDs in the DP-3. The in-viewfinder display of the shutter speed and aperture can be a little tricky to see but it’s not different from that of the DP-1 (and I suspect the DP-2 is the same).

 

[Steve York]

For me, an F with a plain prism. Iconic and I'm used to a top 1/1000 speed from shooting rangefinders. I have all the settings already mapped out in my brain. The electronics of an F3 at this late date would worry me, although the only used Nikons I've ever owned that didn't need service was a pair of (then) circa 25 year old F3's. Even though I wear glasses I preferred the eye level finder to the HP because of the increased viewfinder magnification. I've heard good things about the F32 too.