Is the Nikon F90/N90 series ugly?

[George Mann]

The N2000 is so underrated.

One of my favorites.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Who gives a View attachment 258273 what Kent Rockhead thinks?!?

He likes Hasselblads.

Even a broken clock is correct twice a day.

 

[Prest_400]

Have you actually seen one crack?

It might be the weight (compared to the N80, the N90 is significantly heavier) but I haven't really cared about its plastic exterior. Feels tough.
IIRC the backs went sticky but my unit was dealt with by the former owner. In the lot the F801s was also included. Feels solid but less sophisticated in the wat of AF speed.
And the shutter sound is contundent in both.

N4004/F401, my dad has one and I started shooting with it. But in 2009 it seemed so clunky and ugly that I went to buy an OM1 instead

 

[Helge]

Give me three examples of Ken Rockwell being wrong within 48 hours.

A man is entitled to being wrong once or twice, or even ten times on a personal site, before his personal expertise is to be drawn into question.

You might not like his style or his thinking.
But I have never actually caught him in writing something factually wrong.

 

[titrisol]

The N90 was a thing of beauty when it came out, I couldn't afford one at the time though

The N2000 is so underrated. A great camera that you can get for super cheap. Just make sure to get one that the previous owner didn't let the batteries leak in it.

Amen to that!
The N2000/F301 is a very good camera, even when the batteries have leaked it is not hard to fix

 

[PFGS]

Give me three examples of Ken Rockwell being wrong within 48 hours.

A man is entitled to being wrong once or twice, or even ten times on a personal site, before his personal expertise is to be drawn into question.

You might not like his style or his thinking.
But I have never actually caught him in writing something factually wrong.

I've never seen a genuine factual error on his site, and I think he has a better sense of humor than he gets credit for. As for his opinions and hyperbole, even when they are presented as fact, the rhetorical nature of that presentation is deliberately kept obvious for anyone who can read. I don't much agree with his notion of what makes a good photograph, but I couldn't begin to name all the times I've successfully used his site to research a piece of gear.

EDIT: yes, those Nikons are ugly to my eye. But what do I know, I really like the looks of the Konica FP:

 

[blockend]

But what do I know, I really like the looks of the Konica FP

The Konica typeface is too small for the prism, but otherwise a nice looking lump.

 

[Helge]

The N90 does have a VCR vibe!
But don't worry, it will be cool again.

And that is a bad thing how?
Japanese home entertainment electronics had some of the greatest industrial design of the 20th century.

 

[Helge]

The Konica typeface is too small for the prism, but otherwise a nice looking lump.

That is quite on purpose. It’s part of the late 50s early 60s typographic neoclassicist revival.
It’s emulates and references the strongly spaced capital letters on Greek vases and other Classical Greek inscriptions.

 

[PFGS]

That is quite on purpose. It’s part of the late 50s early 60s typographic neoclassicist revival.
It’s emulates and references the strongly spaced capital letters on Greek vases and other Classical Greek inscriptions.

Type treatment continues on the back:

 

[Huss]

Even a broken clock is correct twice a day.

Is there something that he has written that you disagree with?

 

[Billy Axeman]

Is there something that he has written that you disagree with?

Nobody would dare to question the immeasurable wisdom of a senior member with 31.000+ posts.

 

[blockend]

That is quite on purpose. It’s part of the late 50s early 60s typographic neoclassicist revival.
It’s emulates and references the strongly spaced capital letters on Greek vases and other Classical Greek inscriptions.

There are two issues with it, first, it would be better in an upper and lower case as early Nikon and Canon, second it doesn't match the extended pseudo-serif FP badge. The lens detailing is a complete dog's breakfast, being similar to the FP without serifs, and using an extended face to fill every available millimetre of the facing. The Konica branding would be better in white on black, or needs growing by a couple of pts, or a slightly weightier face. IMO.
It doesn't actually offend me. That response is reserved for the painted italic Nikon of the autofocus era, which is subtle compared to the XG period Minolta with the badge in the O, or the Canon T70 abomination. This isn't 20/20 hindsight, I offered the same pub rants at the time.

 

[Prest_400]

Nikon of the autofocus era, which is subtle compared to the XG period Minolta with the badge in the O, or the Canon T70 abomination. This isn't 20/20 hindsight, I offered the same pub rants at the time.

The high tech perception of those logos! Quite funny in hindsight. Actually I find that out of all these, the Nikon AF logo isn't that bad. However, its application in the F401/N4004 rather hideous, and that gray huge logo over the grip I am sure you would agree with .

The Minolta with an "interlaced" O, screams that time. OTOH, the classic minolta logo also follows that classicism as in this Konica.

In a way it seems to be a 60s vs 70s vs 80s design debate. The 1970 logos seem the most timeless to me.

More film related, I find that the Ilford Delta has an Interlaced triangle which does not scream dated. Branding wise, I really like Ilford's approach in comparison to Kodak and Fuji, it is pleasantly minimalistic IMO.

 

[skorpiius]

For those who aren't part of the Nikon clan:

I don't really think it has enough stylistic qualities to create much of an opinion. It looks smooth, simple, and compact.

 

[blockend]

Actually I find that out of all these, the Nikon AF logo isn't that bad.

Nikon's crime against the eye was putting that silly red trim on their cameras, something they've persisted with to the D850.

More film related, I find that the Ilford Delta has an Interlaced triangle which does not scream dated. Branding wise, I really like Ilford's approach in comparison to Kodak and Fuji, it is pleasantly minimalistic IMO.

Sadly, I can remember the current Ilford branding emerging sometime in the (early?) 1970s. In the 60s Ilford had a fussy snowflake type thing going on. Going way back they had a diamond background, as did Agfa. Vintage Agfa film boxes are a delight, more recent ones threw the kitchen sink in the design. Kodak were just yellow. As a bulk film user, the tin labels were always more subdued than shelf display, presumably as they weren't competing for a casual shopper.

 

[Mike1A]

No. I have 2 N90S and they are fun and simply elegant cameras. HOWEVER .... be prepared to clean off that 90s rubberized finish before it ends up on your face and hands. Cleans up easy with some household ammonia. I have an MB-10 battery pack and a MF-26 back (which adds some contour) and it is like a mini F4. Besides I got both of my N90s for under 50 dollars. Which is a bit less than my F4. Here is a good look of how they are with battery packs and different backs:
http://www.luistriguez.es/fotos/cameras/nikon_n90s/index_nikon_n90s.htm

 

[Chan Tran]

Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder but for my eyes the F90/N90 is ugly but not too ugly. It was the Minolta Maxxum SI series that I think uglier.

 

[Helge]

No. I have 2 N90S and they are fun and simply elegant cameras. HOWEVER .... be prepared to clean off that 90s rubberized finish before it ends up on your face and hands. Cleans up easy with some household ammonia. I have an MB-10 battery pack and a MF-26 back (which adds some contour) and it is like a mini F4. Besides I got both of my N90s for under 50 dollars. Which is a bit less than my F4. Here is a good look of how they are with battery packs and different backs:
http://www.luistriguez.es/fotos/cameras/nikon_n90s/index_nikon_n90s.htm

I find straight alcohol far more effective.
But be prepared to do a lot wiping.
It will feel like you are taking off a layer of the rubber, which you also are.
If it’s the film door it will probably all come off, which is no biggie.
With the textured handles on other cameras, it’s the outer layer that will come off. It will look good afterward. Promise.
Just be patient. And avoid wiping it over buttons, openings and display.
Use some 909 Aerospace Protectant on the remaining rubber when finished.
This will seal and protect it and make the surface nicer to touch.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Is there something that he has written that you disagree with?

Aw gee, just about everything. His ideas of how the photographic world should be. I have been known to take his articles with me to the bathroom to set me free.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Nobody would dare to question the immeasurable wisdom of a senior member with 31.000+ posts.

​

 

[Mike1A]

I find straight alcohol far more effective.
But be prepared to do a lot wiping.
It will feel like you are taking off a layer of the rubber, which you also are.
If it’s the film door it will probably all come off, which is no biggie.
With the textured handles on other cameras, it’s the outer layer that will come off. It will look good afterward. Promise.
Just be patient. And avoid wiping it over buttons, openings and display.
Use some 909 Aerospace Protectant on the remaining rubber when finished.
This will seal and protect it and make the surface nicer to touch.

Yes, I did the alcohol as well on my other, with a green pad. The ammonia really cut through it. But everything went to include any labels or markings. I just took my door off it was easier. But it looks great and it is worth the effort as well as the savings if someone just wants to sell it. I had a lens from the same time period I bought. I was covered in sticky goo but it was clean within 5 minutes. Any of these WILL work.
Mike

 

[CMoore]

Ugly..... a 35mm SLR.?
That's like discussing the aesthetics of a pickup truck.
for heavens sake......... they all look very similar.

 

[Helge]

Ugly..... a 35mm SLR.?
That's like discussing the aesthetics of a pickup truck.
for heavens sake......... they all look very similar.

Cars in general also look alike. That doesn't stop people discussing how they look, and them being markers in the history if industrial design.

 

[darkosaric]

I find F801 to be prettier than F90, as similar as they are. But any AF Nikon cannot compete with beauty of F/F2/F3, regardless of the prism, imo.