- Joined
- Jan 24, 2016
- Messages
- 570
- Format
- Multi Format
It would be nice if Nikon or somebody like Meta 35 would make a firmware update to use the E lenses. Alas, I'm not counting on it.
Now, if I had a complaint, it would be that it won't stop down with the newer "E" series lenses with the electromagnetic shutters.
That must be a gag review. No one could be that much of a dolt. Well, maybe one of the self-proclaimed expert "photographers" from a site like Dpreview...."Camera will not work with CompactFlash or other digital media cards. You must buy a cartridge of tape, which allows for just 24 shots. No LCD screen for image playback. Extremely frustrated and returned item.
UPDATE: After reading some of the comments, I conducted extensive research into "film photography" over the last two days and I now understand a fair amount about the subject. As a result, I have no plans to reorder the F6, but I do have a shipment of film canisters (Kodak) coming so that I can test them in my brand new Digital Nikon SLR. I think it is remarkable how old technology like filmstrips can produce resolution greater than my CompactFlash cards. Seeing will be believing."
You are one lucky guy; enjoy to the fullest!Ok, well I found an "open box" F6, and the shop cut me a deal, so I paid roughly what the grey market ones go for. But still, it was on roll 0. And now it has a 3 year warranty with Nikon!
My impressions? Well it's exceeding my expectations. Personally I thought the old D2H AF system would show it's rear in ways my D750s AF doesn't. I'm pleasantly surprised at how good it is. I also though the AF spread would be constricting, considering it was designed for crop. Not so, the spread is great! The rule of 3rds points are pretty much right where I want them. That old 5 point system in my F100 feels antiquated. It's faster than the F100 for sure. Faster than the F5? Idk, I don't have one on hand. Personally I think the F5 is a non starter due to it's size. I'll take the better accuracy and point spread over raw speed anyways.
Am I wrong that the screen shows nearly F2 depth of field? I'd swear that it does. It's a fabulous finder. I installed a DK-17M and I can still see out to the edges. I have 4 rolls to pick up tonight (Provia, Velvia, and 400H), and if the focus system is as good as I think, I'll probably go back to the standard finder for the slightly better eye relief.
We have all these absurdly sharp lenses now. I'm using the Sigma 24/1.4, 35/1.4, and Nikon 58mm 1.4G. These three lenses are my basic wedding kit. I can't wait to see chromes from these lenses, particularly the 58mm. AND, given the data imprint system, if the 58mm is giving me trouble at 1.4 focus-wise, I'll know from the frame instead of trying to remember.
I also put the metering system through it's paces. I was up in MA last weekend and boy did we have some snow. On Saturday we went out snowshoeing, and I brought the F6, 58 and 24mm lenses. I did some auto bracketing (auto bracketing is WONDERFUL for chromes, after coming from an M4 here) so I'll be able to see the cameras pick, and then hopefully a salvageable exposure on either end if it got it wrong.
My goal is to integrate the F6 into more of my wedding work. 645 has really been the staple film wedding format for the last few years, and for pretty good reasons. But with 220 gone, Contax 645 prices through the roof, it's a harder sell for me. I always prefered 6x6 and 6x7 for MF medium format anyways. I personally think the Nikkor 58/1.4G is a good stand in for the Contax 80/2. Both were made to prioritize wide open rendering and 3D subjects (i.e. real people). If I can get 36 exposures, fast loading, AF that works, and decent detail from Portra films in 35mm I think it will be a great replacement for 220. Just have to test-test-test.
The F6 is amazing! Do Nikon a favor and get one.
"Camera will not work with CompactFlash or other digital media cards. You must buy a cartridge of tape, which allows for just 24 shots. No LCD screen for image playback. Extremely frustrated and returned item.
UPDATE: After reading some of the comments, I conducted extensive research into "film photography" over the last two days and I now understand a fair amount about the subject. As a result, I have no plans to reorder the F6, but I do have a shipment of film canisters (Kodak) coming so that I can test them in my brand new Digital Nikon SLR. I think it is remarkable how old technology like filmstrips can produce resolution greater than my CompactFlash cards. Seeing will be believing."
That must be a gag review ...
BE CAREFUL buying a used F6 in the USA. Nikon USA will NOT service non USA serial number F6s. .
Saving grace is it is a USA model - the rep at Nikon said they would not have touched it if it was a grey market camera.
There are exceptions. For instance, if you're in a foreign country and make a purchase there, Nikon has been known to "transfer" the warranty to the U.S., but I believe its been on a case by case basis; and I think that a damaged camera, lens, etc. falls into that category.So what happens of you lived in some other country where you bought an F6 and then moved to the USA? Or are on vacation in the USA and the camera fails? Nikon won't service it? I can see not doing warranty repairs, but not touching it all all seems rather parochial.
USA ones have a gold sticker under the flap that covers the ISO etc buttons. Mine does.So, how do you tell if it's a non USA serial number?
I dropped my F5 at the Nikon Service Point, because the front dial was misbehaving. So, they will: replace the front dial, replace the rubber and CLA it. Cost: ~$230. And, since somebody complained about "grey market" cameras, I bought mine in Japan, but it's absolutely no issue for the local (Austria+Germany) Nikon services.You call or email Nikon USA and ask if it is a USA serial number. If it is NOT USA they will not fix it!!!!
As to reliability the F5 is built like a tank. It was built as a professional camera. Like I said, I have been abusing them since they first came out, (cost about $2,000 new, my first one) and never had a failure, NEVER. I do have them CLA'd every two years.It can be done by independent agencies. You do NOT need to go to Nikon, read faster and less expensive, just as good and maybe better. Considering you can buy an F5 now for about $300 to $400, CLA about $120. The F6 was built as a camera for advanced amateurs. The F6 just does not feel as sturdy.
I also thought the F6 was a bit light, compared to the F4 and F5 versions. I recently bought the MD-40 battery module, and it brings it to the heft of the F4 and F5.Am i the only one that prefers cameras with some heft to them?
I have held both an F5 and an F6 in my hands and i like the F5 better, feels very stable compared to the F6 and since i have big hands the F5 is just more ergonomic.
And, the F5 is a whole lot cheaper than an F6.
I will eventually buy one off Ebay and a few AF-D lenses to go with it.
That's quite a range or did you mean from 250,000 to 500,000 shots?. Still a lot of film at 36 shots per rolls or are these practice shots on a digital to help with the feel of a camera for film shots?
pentaxuser
... Just a boxing match could require 5-10 rolls per round times 10 rounds, and so on. ...
So, a three minute round is 180 seconds. To shoot 5 rolls in 180 seconds means one roll every 36 seconds - basically one frame every second -- not taking into account time to rewind and change the roll.
That seems extreme to me, unless multiple cameras are being used.
In the days before digital, even with multiple cameras, there were film backs capable of 250 feet rolls of film. Motor drives ran at 5-8 fps. With about 40mm per frame (36+4 for the space), you'd get over 1800 frames of 35mm exposures per back. The Nikon F2, F3, etc. and Canon F1 were all available with the 250 ft backs. The limiting factor was power to the drives.So, a three minute round is 180 seconds. To shoot 5 rolls in 180 seconds means one roll every 36 seconds - basically one frame every second -- not taking into account time to rewind and change the roll.
That seems extreme to me, unless multiple cameras are being used.
Pros have at least 3 cameras, 5 in some instances. 5 to 10 fps motors....
... film backs capable of 250 feet rolls of film. Motor drives ran at 5-8 fps. With about 40mm per frame (36+4 for the space), you'd get over 1800 frames of 35mm exposures per back. ...
There's both good and bad news when it comes to the 250" backs. It's just as easy to miss "the shot", as it is to get it. Those backs do lessen the odds of missing the critical instant. Even though the Speed Graphic was a literal "one shot" camera, there are many, many shots that were "the shot". It still takes a good photographer to know, and anticipate the critical moment.OK - I understand. So, since you know afterwards what the critical moments of the match were, you can go to those frames and find the best shot. I suppose the only challenge might be the boxers might be positioned poorly at times or focus might be a challenge - but maybe not if you're using 28mm or 24mm lenses. Still, it's easier than having to use a Speed Graphic.
I've seen those 250' backs - I always thought they'd be great for Formula 1 or Football.
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?