Giving up my Nikon f100?

bed_hugs · Mar 22, 2013

Hey guys! newbie to the forum here. Just wanted to ask your opinion something I've been mulling over in my head. I have a nikon F100 that I love and have had some great shots with, but It's size gets in the way for me. I'm a college student and I don't want to lug it around all the time with my schoolbag. As you guys know, there's no point in having the camera if I never have it around to shoot with haha.

Point is, I've been eyeing this little Olympus om2n w/50 1.8 at my local camera shop. It's in near mint condition and at about $100 it's not out of my price range, plus I can still pick up a couple other lenses on KEH for pretty cheap. I've been thinking about selling my f100 and just buying it since it's so damn small compared to what I've been using. Seems like it'd be a nice match for me. what do y'all think?

thanks you guys

tkamiya · Mar 23, 2013

It's really a personal thing. I can't tell you to eat oranges if you don't like'em! I have THREE F-100 because I like them so much. It's big and rather heavy but not too bad.

Olympus are fine cameras. I had an OM10 way back in my youth. Are you sure you'll want to give up all the automation and go back to pretty much everything manual? No auto focus, no matrix metering, no auto winding without winder attachment, etc, etc, etc? If so, go right ahead....

Another thing... if weight and size of F100 bothers you, any decent SLR isn't going to be THAT much lighter and smaller. To me, it doesn't make any practical difference.

PhotoJim · Mar 23, 2013

You could just pick up a Nikon EM or FG and it would work as a second body with your Nikon lenses that you already own. The 50/1.8E is very small and would make a very small package.

The EM lacks full manual mode but is so tiny and easy to use, you may not care. I had onw for awhile and I quite enjoyed it.

LiamG · Mar 23, 2013

Are you already using the smallest possible lens? Like a 50 1.8 AF, the 50/1.8 series E mentioned above, or something like that? There's always the FG- lighter than an OM, and the market is flooded with them.

Ricardo Miranda · Mar 23, 2013

Hi! Welcome!
If you really like that OM2-N, than go for it!
But, if you want to retain use of your Nikon lenses, how about a F80 or a even smaller, lighter and very nice F75?

bed_hugs · Mar 23, 2013

Well the camera originally came with a 24-85 zoom, but I got rid of that and just bought a nifty fifty. I didn't buy glass after that since that's all I really needed for the shots I like to take. Switching to a whole new system wouldn't really hurt as far me having lenses left over

bed_hugs · Mar 23, 2013

I don't think I'd mind going back to manual from all the automation. The only thing I'd miss is the 1/8000 shutter speed but even then I rarely use it.

Alan Gales · Mar 23, 2013

Olympus XA?

BMbikerider · Mar 23, 2013

I have both a Nikon F100 and Nikon F80's and when I go out on the motorcycle it is nearly always the F8 that comes with me. Sure it is nearly all plastic, but what isn't these days. The metering is more or less the same as the F100, in a smaller and much lighter body. Don't forget the Olympus OM2n is going to be AT LEAST 30 years old and they don't last forever. Stick with Nikon and you have all you want.

Steve Smith · Mar 23, 2013

PhotoJim said:
You could just pick up a Nikon EM or FG and it would work as a second body with your Nikon lenses that you already own.

I was going to post exactly the same advice. The FG is a great body in a compact size. Very similar in size to the OM.

If you want small, look at the Pentax MX.

Steve.

phirehouse · Mar 23, 2013

Another vote for the N75, (F75). super light, great meter and will work with full-frame VR glass.

mr rusty · Mar 23, 2013

The Om2n with a 50mm 1.8 is a great combination. OM2 is aperture priority auto and is an advanced off the film system that works well. Its hundred bucks. A fair price if it comes with a little warranty. Get it, use it, keep the F100 for now. Make the decision which to keep once you have used the OM2 for a while. GAS says unless you need the $$ desperately you'll keep both anyway!

elekm · Mar 23, 2013

If you wanted to stay with Nikon, you could take a look at the FE/FM series. They are smaller bodies that are mostly manual, although certain models offer autoexposure.

If you do move to Olympus, you'll be buying into a system that is highly regarded by its users. The bodies are well made, and the OM-2 uses S76/LR44 batteries.

All Japanese cameras from the 1980s and earlier will need new foam seals, which are simple to replace.

The Olympus was a full-system camera with a huge selection of lenses, winders, motor drives, dedicated flash units and more. The OM-2 also has a sophisticated metering system. You will need to get used to having the shutters-speed dial at the base of the lens, but if you shoot mostly in automatic, it's not a big issue.

It's aperture-priority, so you'll want to keep an eye on your shutter speeds as you shoot.

Chan Tran · Mar 23, 2013

bed_hugs said:
Hey guys! newbie to the forum here. Just wanted to ask your opinion something I've been mulling over in my head. I have a nikon F100 that I love and have had some great shots with, but It's size gets in the way for me. I'm a college student and I don't want to lug it around all the time with my schoolbag. As you guys know, there's no point in having the camera if I never have it around to shoot with haha.

Point is, I've been eyeing this little Olympus om2n w/50 1.8 at my local camera shop. It's in near mint condition and at about $100 it's not out of my price range, plus I can still pick up a couple other lenses on KEH for pretty cheap. I've been thinking about selling my f100 and just buying it since it's so damn small compared to what I've been using. Seems like it'd be a nice match for me. what do y'all think?

thanks you guys

I don't have an F100 but I do have an F5, F3HP with motor drive, FM and an Olympus OM-2n. I don't feel going from say the F5 or F3 with motor which is a big and heavy package down to the OM-2 would make it that much easier to carry around. When I need a camera to easily carry around I have to use something like the Olympus XA. Because although smaller, the OM-2 is still not pocketable.

one90guy · Mar 23, 2013

LiamG said:
Are you already using the smallest possible lens? Like a 50 1.8 AF, the 50/1.8 series E mentioned above, or something like that? There's always the FG- lighter than an OM, and the market is flooded with them.

I will 2nd the FG, I bought one about a year ago. I get great results from it.

David

vpwphoto · Mar 23, 2013

I think you are overthinking... the OM isn't that small. IF you ever decide to do some flash photography the Nikon and SB series flashes are the only automation I ever found worth a damn. That system would properly expose "chromes" in your sleep.

Vonder · Mar 23, 2013

One trick you may want to consider is lithium batteries in the F100. The F100 is heavier than the OM but a lot of that is the motor drive and the AA batteries - which are also reasons to adore the thing. AA Batteries are everywhere. But the lithium batteries are lighter, so that saves weight. Can't do much about size though. The F100 is just bigger.

Andre Noble · Mar 23, 2013

Keep the Nikon F100! If you want smaller, save up for a Voigtlander Bessa type rangefinder camera such as Bessa R3A or R2A.

removed-user-1 · Mar 23, 2013

I used an FG through college and I'd like to get another for when I don't want to drag the motorized F3HP around. It's a great camera that's very easy to use at eye-level (I love the metering display on this camera!). I used the TTL flash for lots of work, including macro, with great results. It's not quite a pocket camera, but it's definitely smaller than the F100 (which I've also owned). The only major things missing on the FG are AE lock, DOF preview, and a PC connection for external flash sync. The first two are mostly convenience features in my opinion; the external flash connection is easily addressed with a $10 part. Unless your 50mm is a G lens (no aperture ring), it should be perfect for the FG.

Having said all this, I've also used the OM2n. I sold one once for a friend, and of course I tried it all out first. I almost bought that kit myself, it was very nice and I found the flash system perfectly usable. If you like it, get it!

mgb74 · Mar 23, 2013

I have a N90s (roughly equivalent to F100 size/bulk) and OM bodies. I prefer the OM due to it's smaller size; though these older eyes prefer the AF.

But if you plan to carry an SLR with only the 50mm lens on an everyday basis, keep the F100 and buy an older RF with a 1.7-1.9 lens (Canon, Olympus, Minolta). You lose nothing and you gain a 2nd camera with complementary capabilities.

bed_hugs · Mar 23, 2013

I really like this idea but now all you've done is make me want a rangefinder haha

Pumalite · Mar 24, 2013

I would sell nothing and have them all; which, I do.Each one has its use.

flatulent1 · Mar 25, 2013

What Pumalite said. Keep the F100 and get the Oly as a second camera. Decide next year. Or not.

Personally I would add an N80; it has all the features of the F100 without the size and bulk. And they're newer than the OM2N by, um, 20 years or so.

skahde · Mar 25, 2013

Don't switch systems if not forced to. It usually costs a lot and gains little. You have a camera which is part of a large, extensive system with all options one could think of. Yes, the OM2 is less bulky than your F100 (owned both) but neither is a camera to always have in your pocket, nor is a Bessa. I'd look for a nice compact to supplement your F100.

GarageBoy · Mar 25, 2013

Nikon FGs and FG-20s are dirt cheap and lightweight. They also offer metered manual and AE

Giving up my Nikon f100?

removed-user-1

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency