There's probably a reason for that. The F5 is a battery sucking professional lump that performs the same job as much lighter, better handling cameras in 2016. A camera more appreciated than used from a modern perspective, but go for a well-loved amateur model if you must own an F5.I bought mine about 3 years ago and have not used it as much as I should
Can not go wrong with an F100. I have owned two and they are great. Accurate meters and light weight.
The F5 takes eight (8!) AA batteries, and unlike its predecessors there is no detachable pack-free alternative, it's all integrated power. In a 1990s press scrum that made perfect sense, but subsequent pro cameras opted for single unit rechargeable cells. It isn't for me to say whether carrying that much energy is a practical proposition or not, but having handled a couple of F5s I know I'd be reaching for something lighter once the novelty had worn off. The F4 was the last professional Nikon to take AF and non-AF lenses, and function without a power pack, which makes it a more flexible tool for the majority. None of these things will matter if someone has an F5 shaped craving or a hole in their collection.I've not seen battery usage as a problem. Nonetheless I am seeking out an MH-30 charger and MN-30 battery pack for mine. I don't shoot hundreds of frames a day either.
The F5 requires 8 of them. Useful firepower for covering a presidential resignation, overkill for most stuff. Does anyone still use film for the duties the Nikon F5 was designed for?Well zip & zest you get with this machine! The ultimate camera for weight/speed/handling. I use it mostly with AF 80-200 2.8 ED; then this thing is really 'alive' in your hands. What are you guys meaning 'eating batteries'?
Definitly not as tough as my F3hp but I never had an issue with them. The F100 meter is very much more accurate.They felt flimsy to me (compared to F/F2/F3/F4.)
Can not go wrong with an F100. I have owned two and they are great. Accurate meters and light weight.
... the Nikon F4 was IMO, the pinnacle of Nikon cameras with its traditional controls.
The F5 requires 8 of them. Useful firepower for covering a presidential resignation, overkill for most stuff. Does anyone still use film for the duties the Nikon F5 was designed for?
That was not what I meant when I said I havent used it as much as I should. The camera is not particularly heavy on batteries. The extra heft actually helps when using it in low light with slow shutter speed hand held. I have been using it this week and enjoyed it very much. I recently added a 50mm f1.4 af D to my collection just to use with the F5.There's probably a reason for that. The F5 is a battery sucking professional lump that performs the same job as much lighter, better handling cameras in 2016. A camera more appreciated than used from a modern perspective, but go for a well-loved amateur model if you must own an F5.
You're creating a straw man. What I'm saying is the F5 is a very focused (sic) camera built to do a particular job at a particular time. Most of what it does well - things like getting through a roll of film in 4 seconds or so - became the job of d*g*t*l cameras. It's a very well built camera, but so are the F, F2, F3 and F4 and they don't require 8 AA cells simply to function. I would imagine it's appeal is mainly to nostalgists who also yearn for autofocus and multi-mode exposure settings, which is pretty niche, or people who think more is more. Of course people should buy what camera they want, I'm saying why other options might be better. It's called discussion.Gee Whiz! I guess most of us get the point. You don't like the F5.
Dismissing all of your observation/complaints doesn't mean that someone shouldn't
buy one to fit their wants.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?