Need help picking a Nikon SLR

Chan Tran · Jan 22, 2017

Why do people criticize the F3 for not having what is called today the ISO hot shoe (which started its life as shoe for optional viewfinder) but not about the F2 or F both have similar hot shoe arrangement as the F3 but not the same.

fstop · Jan 22, 2017

I don't know, most pros and advanced non pro use off the cameras flash anyway.

benveniste · Jan 22, 2017

frank said:
"I'd suggest an FE2."
"The F100 is also a fine choice"
Does the FE2 or F100 have a flippable AI tab?

Neither the FE2 nor the F100 has a flippable tab; nor does the FA or FM3a. The older 28mm f/4's would need modification to work safely, which is why I led with "first things first."

benveniste · Jan 22, 2017

Chan Tran said:
Why do people criticize the F3 for not having what is called today the ISO hot shoe (which started its life as shoe for optional viewfinder) but not about the F2 or F both have similar hot shoe arrangement as the F3 but not the same.

I can't speak for "people," but here's my reasoning. Neither the F2 nor the F support TTL flash, so you didn't lose all that much by using an AS-4. By the 1980 introduction date of the F3, though, the "ISO" hot shoe had pretty much become an industry standard except for professional Nikon bodies. Nikon didn't want to upset what they saw as their core market, and I sort of get that. But the only TTL flash available for the F3 at introduction was the compact SB-12. Apparently, in classic Nikon marketing style, they believed that Pro's didn't really need "new fangled" technology. This attitude was also seen with technologies such as autofocus and VR, and Nikon's market share suffered each time.

The SB-16 didn't show up until 1983, around the same time as the FE2, FA, and FG. All 3 of those cameras had included TTL flash. By this point, the value of using an ISO shoe flash across the product line should have been obvious, and Nikon also introduced the F3P with that in mind. Despite this, Nikon not only continued to sell two versions of the same flashes (SB-15/17, SB-16a/b, SB-21a/b), but failed to include TTL capabilities in the F3P's finder. So while Nikon's decision to stay with the F/F2 arrangement may have been defensible in 1980, by 1983 it clearly was not. Nikon should have given the F3P's finder TTL and marketed the AS-17 then rather than waiting another 15+ years.

Fortunately, the Metz SCA system came along, and with that system you could get away with just swapping modules. For someone like "quixotic" or myself who also shoots medium format, that may still be the best alternative, although it does not appear that SCA system gear is still being made.

narsuitus · Jan 22, 2017

Chan Tran said:
Why do people criticize the F3 for not having what is called today the ISO hot shoe (which started its life as shoe for optional viewfinder) but not about the F2 or F both have similar hot shoe arrangement as the F3 but not the same.

I criticized the F3 for not being able to use the same AS-1 flash coupler as my Nikon F and F2. I had to get an AS-4 flash coupler for my F3.

narsuitus · Jan 22, 2017

Chan Tran said:
...ISO hot shoe (which started its life as shoe for optional viewfinder)...

If I remember correctly, the hot shoe started as a cold shoe on rangefinders that needed an optional viewfinder. My Argus C3 had a cold shoe for mounting an optional viewfinder that aided in composition while using a 35mm wide angle lens or a 100mm telephoto lens.

Argus C3 by Narsuitus, on Flickr

rthollenbeck · Jan 22, 2017

benveniste said:
I can't speak for "people," but here's my reasoning. Neither the F2 nor the F support TTL flash, so you didn't lose all that much by using an AS-4. By the 1980 introduction date of the F3, though, the "ISO" hot shoe had pretty much become an industry standard except for professional Nikon bodies. Nikon didn't want to upset what they saw as their core market, and I sort of get that. But the only TTL flash available for the F3 at introduction was the compact SB-12. Apparently, in classic Nikon marketing style, they believed that Pro's didn't really need "new fangled" technology. This attitude was also seen with technologies such as autofocus and VR, and Nikon's market share suffered each time.

I don't think that's the reason. First I think Nikon considered the AS-4 type shoe to be an "F-thing" and part of that identity and therefore important to the f3 as well. Second, The F-s are their pro cameras. At the beginning time of the F3, hotshoe flashes were not a big deal for pro-useage. Mostly pc flashes in studios and grip mounted flashes elsewhere. Additionally it seems they planned for this eventuality anyway because there are internal contacts for the prism to have a hotshoe as in the f3-press.

Maybe at one time since the prism was removable, it was thought it was not wise to let the hotshoe have leverage on that removable mechanism. Pros were big on trusted items then...Nikon kept making the f2 at very high sale prices well after the intro of the F3

Chris Livsey · Jan 22, 2017

benveniste said:
although it does not appear that SCA system gear is still being made.

Metz seems to think they are still available:
https://www.metz-mecatech.de/en/lighting/flash-units/accessories/adapters-and-accessories.html

benveniste · Jan 22, 2017

Chris Livsey said:
Metz seems to think they are still available:
https://www.metz-mecatech.de/en/lighting/flash-units/accessories/adapters-and-accessories.html

The adapters are still being sold, but no more flashes and it does not appear that new SCA adapters are being developed.

Chris Livsey · Jan 22, 2017

benveniste said:
The adapters are still being sold, but no more flashes and it does not appear that new SCA adapters are being developed.

I'm not being awkward, honestly, but the flash unit I would expect to have SCA compatibility the current "hammerhead" mecablitz 76 MZ-5 digital does indeed list as having that: "SCA adapter system (flash unit universally suitable for use with different cameras)"
https://www.metz-mecatech.de/en/lig...nits/mecablitz-76-mz-5-digital.html?mobile=1'

Now in the context of this discussion its price of £600+ may possibly be a problem? I also agree it is a dying system but our local used camera emporium has shelves of earlier hammerheads and SCA adapters still seem to command a healthy, for the sellers, price.

benveniste · Jan 22, 2017

rthollenbeck said:
I don't think that's the reason. First I think Nikon considered the AS-4 type shoe to be an "F-thing" and part of that identity and therefore important to the f3 as well. Second, The F-s are their pro cameras. At the beginning time of the F3, hotshoe flashes were not a big deal for pro-useage. Mostly pc flashes in studios and grip mounted flashes elsewhere. Additionally it seems they planned for this eventuality anyway because there are internal contacts for the prism to have a hotshoe as in the f3-press.

"Part of that identity" is not the best reason to keep an outdated (and awkward) design in a professional tool. If I remember correctly, the best selling flashes of pre-TTL era were the Vivitar 283 and 285. But if it was in fact "mostly PC flashes in studios and grip mounted flashes elsewhere," as you claim, then there was even less reason to keep the proprietary connector. So while we can agree to disagree on the state of hot shoe flashes in 1980, by 1983 the trend was quite clear. Besides Nikon's FG, FE2, and FA, Leica, Canon, Pentax, Olympus, and Minolta all had ISO hot shoes on their top-of-the-line cameras. While Nikon "planned for this eventuality," the lack of TTL for the F3P shoe shows they either didn't plan very well or failed to execute.

So I'll hold to my opinion. Not adding including a TTL hot shoe in original F3 design was perhaps justifiable in 1980. But by 1983, it was clear that it was the wrong decision, yet Nikon didn't do anything to remedy the situation until after the F5 was introduced.

Chan Tran · Jan 22, 2017

Actually I think the current ISO hot shoe is an outdated design. Was originally designed to hold something much lighter in weight.

rthollenbeck · Jan 22, 2017

benveniste said:
"Part of that identity" is not the best reason to keep an outdated (and awkward) design in a professional tool. If I remember correctly, the best selling flashes of pre-TTL era were the Vivitar 283 and 285. But if it was in fact "mostly PC flashes in studios and grip mounted flashes elsewhere," as you claim, then there was even less reason to keep the proprietary connector. So while we can agree to disagree on the state of hot shoe flashes in 1980, by 1983 the trend was quite clear.

I don't think we disagree at all. I'm just saying that I think that was the prevailing ideology (@ least at Nikon) at the time the camera was released.
Hind site it 20/20.... I'm not sure even that would have change the mode of Nikon..... doing things he Nikon way at that time.

flavio81 · Jan 23, 2017

Chan Tran said:
Why do people criticize the F3 for not having what is called today the ISO hot shoe (which started its life as shoe for optional viewfinder) but not about the F2 or F both have similar hot shoe arrangement as the F3 but not the same.

There are many things to criticize about the F3...

But, i agree with you on this.

frank · Jan 23, 2017

The only thing I'd complain about the F3, is the viewfinder info illumination. I very rarely use on camera flash so the weird flash shoe doesn't bother me.

quixotic · Jan 23, 2017

I've really become infatuated with this little gem. I've only been able to expose 17 frames so far, but it works well in minus 7 degrees C (about 20 F?) weather.

Sure, the hot shoe is weird, but I managed to make a bubble level set-up for it out of 1/4" and 1/2" thick chunks of teflon, some cheap bubbles from Home Depot, and a bicycle helmet mirror that was gathering dust. It's very snug on there, and I calibrated it with some 0.1mm brass shims from Lee Valley. The ball and socket on the mirror is somewhat fragile (ie, plastic), but miraculously, it turned out to have the precise same h/d/w as a container for a Minolta spot meter that I no longer use.

flavio81 · Jan 24, 2017

quixotic said:
I've really become infatuated with this little gem.

I never got infatuated with my F3. It was a good camera, nice camera, but the F2 i liked much better. And the Canon New F1 (same era, direct competitor) totally blows it out of the water. So what i did is i sold my Nikon F3 as part payment for a mint Canon New F1, 1984 LA Olympics edition.

Some of my annoyances with the F3 were:
- only 1/80 + B manual speeds
- manual speed can't be triggered by the main shutter release button
- and battery change is slow*
- stupid viewfinder illuminator button and system
- viewfinder illuminator bulb almost always dies...
- AE lock button fell down on many F3 cameras out there
- too tiny, almost ridiculously tiny "+/-" display for manual mode, rendering manual mode appaling compared to the F2.
- advance lever always feels like it's going to get loose (all F3 i've handled show this play, seems it is a feature, not a fault)
- shutter button mushy, so you can't physically 'feel' the trigger point. The F2 is fantastic in this respect.
- screen not brighter than F2 screen (where's the improvement?)
- flimsy double exposure lever
- clumsy (to engage/disengage) shutter button lock
- F2 can couple exposure meter to pre-AI and also to AI lenses, with the use of appropiate viewfinder. F3 only with AI lenses.

and, design fault:
- key device for exposure measuring is the glass-disc potentiometer, aka "FRE" (functional resistance element) that measures the position of the aperture ring. This device is located under the ASA dial...
... that is, under the flash accesory socket...
... which means that if you put a flash, and someone knocks/impacts the flash, it might also crack the FRE disc, rendering all metering useless.
In other words, a key component is located in a place where it can be damaged.

aaaaaand...

- in my city i've seen way too much F3 cameras with dead meters or electronics: the meter in mine died (and I babysit my cameras), my friend's F3 died as well. Two is too many. It seems high humidity is too much for the F3. On the other hand, the F3 has had many revisions through its lifetime, so perhaps later F3s are just fine.

* on the plus side, batteries on the Nikon F3 last for years and years.

Craig · Jan 24, 2017

I'm the reverse, I have a pair of New F-1's and an old F-1, and I have never really come to like either of them; as much as I wanted to. I loved my F3 in comparison, the film wind lever in particular is so smooth, it's a beautiful piece of machinery. I always found the metering of the F3 much better than the Canon's, I never trusted the results of the F-1's meters and was always second guessing them.

F4 screens drop into the F3 and are brighter. That said, I didn't have a problem with the standard F3 screen's brightness.

flavio81 · Jan 24, 2017

Craig said:
I'm the reverse, I have a pair of New F-1's and an old F-1, and I have never really come to like either of them; as much as I wanted to. I loved my F3 in comparison, the film wind lever in particular is so smooth, it's a beautiful piece of machinery. I always found the metering of the F3 much better than the Canon's, I never trusted the results of the F-1's meters and was always second guessing them.

I think the F3 meter pattern (80/20) is excellent, but on the New F-1 and old F-1 you have the similar "partial" pattern. And on the F-1N you can fit the spot pattern if you like.

Of course, shooting slides with the F3 is also a piece of cake.

It might be a matter of not being accustomed. In any case my F-1N shoots slide films perfectly well, and i have the centerweighted pattern on mine, which should be the pattern that will lead one to more "second guessing" when shooting slides! Shooting slides with my original F-1 ("partial" metering) is very easy.

As for film wind smoothness, yes, the F-1N winds film like if you were grinding nuts inside the camera. But the shutter and mirror are really smooth. I will concede, too, that the Nikon F3 also has a very very smooth shutter and mirror action.

But what sets the F-1N apart for me is the viewfinder. It is excellent in manual mode and also in aperture-priority mode. At manual mode. showing at the same time, and clearly:
- shutter speed
- f/stop measured by the meter
- f/stop chosen by you
Also the way the viewfinder illuminator is implemented, works perfectly.

Craig said:
F4 screens drop into the F3 and are brighter. That said, I didn't have a problem with the standard F3 screen's brightness.

Neither did I. What i mean is that there wasn't a big improvement in brightness from the F2 to F3, while there was a big improvement from the F to F2.

Theo Sulphate · Jan 24, 2017

flavio81 said:
...
But what sets the F-1N apart for me is the viewfinder.
...

It's a great viewfinder. I've long had a viewfinder-fetish (ever since the Mamiya-Sekor Auto XTL), and I like the way the F-1N displays different scales as you select between aperture priority, shutter priority, and manual modes.

Leigh B · Jan 24, 2017

When I was repairing Nikons in the 1980s, the F3 was king of the hill.

I worked at an independent service shop in Wasington DC that only did Nikons.
Our clients were all pros, including most of the press photographers in town.
And there were hundreds of them.

These guys beat up their cameras unmercifully, and expected us to fix them, which we did.
I don't think we ever failed to return an F3 to proper working order.

I currently have two titanium F3T bodies with MD-4 motor drives.
That combination is very well balanced, and not heavy. It's a pleasure to shoot.

There are plenty of good used examples available, not terribly expensive.
A standard F3HP would be my first recommendation, as that finder is easier to use than the DE-2.

- Leigh

Theo Sulphate · Jan 24, 2017

These two F3/T's have been in use for a very long time and have never given me a problem. The LCDs in the viewfinders are still clear as well.

Need help picking a Nikon SLR

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency