I've never seen the bullseye with a incident dome, I take it the dome can be removed for reflective metering?
A little research shows that a plain F prism will fit and F2 if you choose to go that way.F2, plain prisms were made in much smaller numbers than the F, for much of the F production run the plain prism was the standard prism that came with the camera.
I had the F and now have an F2 (and F4). The F2 seems a bit more robust and handles better than the F. When I went shopping for an F2, there were surprisingly few with the plain prism, and those went for a premium as does the prism alone.
Nikon reps showed a technique for dealing with the back for reloading. You grip the lens with one hand holding the camera/lens with the back facing up. Remove the back and slip it under your fingers holding the lens. Load with your free hand, then put things back together. Easier to do than describe, I've used the same technique with a Leica.
I'm thinking of picking up a Nikon F or F2, but I'm having trouble deciding between the two.
The feature improvements of the F2 aren't that important to me(...) I'd get both with the plain unmetered prism.
I'm used to my barnack Leica and Rolleiflex, and so far I've never used an SLR that gave the same feeling of engineering quality.
Or are there any other SLRs that feel as good or better to use? I was considering the Contax line as well for that C/Y Zeiss glass.
Thank you for all the amazing feedback!
Sounds like the F2 is probably the way to go, they’re both roughly the same price on eBay these days.
I didn’t realise the F was both smaller and lighter than the F2, that would be a pretty important consideration for me but it also sounds like a small difference.
And yeah as I said in my first post I’m used to barnack loading so the hinged door vs removable back is really a non issue. In fact I kinda prefer the clean back of the F, I never use film memos
Yep don't need a meter, I figure if I want a metered SLR for convenience I'll go all the way and use a camera that has full AE like my OM2.
I have a Pentax SV on the shelf which is very well made and was a delight to CLA, but the viewfinder is pretty dim even after a thorough clean, I imagine the Spotmatics are similar.
I actually really like the look of the Canon F-1, but it's even more of a beast than the F and F2 haha.
Yep don't need a meter, I figure if I want a metered SLR for convenience I'll go all the way and use a camera that has full AE like my OM2.
I have a Pentax SV on the shelf which is very well made and was a delight to CLA, but the viewfinder is pretty dim even after a thorough clean, I imagine the Spotmatics are similar.
I actually really like the look of the Canon F-1, but it's even more of a beast than the F and F2 haha. I also really love the ethos behind the LX, but I've heard it's getting riskier and riskier to own one, not only for the sticky mirror issue but also the shutters are starting to die. I also considered the Leicaflex, they look beautiful, but R glass is a bit spendy as a secondary system
Yep don't need a meter, I figure if I want a metered SLR for convenience I'll go all the way and use a camera that has full AE like my OM2.
I'm thinking of picking up a Nikon F or F2, but I'm having trouble deciding between the two.
The feature improvements of the F2 aren't that important to me — my main 35mm camera is a Leica iif so the "difficult" loading of the F is totally fine, I can't remember wishing I had 1/2000s available, and the better shutter button position is nice but I imagine you'd get used to either one. I'd get both with the plain unmetered prism.
So for me it would come down to subjective feeling between the two. I've held an F2 Titan for all of 20 seconds. I can't decide whether I like the sharp edges of the original F or not. I've heard people say it's feels a bit smaller in the hands than the F2, and I kind of like the idea that it's built on the bones of Nikon's best rangefinder. I also keep hearing the F2 is more refined, which appeals but I don't really know what that actually translates to. I'm used to my barnack Leica and Rolleiflex, and so far I've never used an SLR that gave the same feeling of engineering quality.
Anybody that can compare both, is there one that just feels better to shoot, features aside? Or are there any other SLRs that feel as good or better to use? I was considering the Contax line as well for that C/Y Zeiss glass.
Amen to that! The OM line is a stroke of design genius, but I really wish they just went all out on a special edition or something, because both the samples I've owned have felt kinda fragile and clunky in use. It's a camera I should love but just don'tI just wish Olympus had made a meterless variant of the OM1/ OM1n
I think this is what I'll probably feel as well, and why I'm leaning towards the F even though the F2 is better in almost every way on the spec sheet (and to an extent in looks). It's the same reason I love my Leica iif so dearly, even when my cheapo Canon 7 has it beat in almost every way.I've found the F2 to not be as invisible (it did not spark joy) a camera to me as the F, which for all of its ergonomic dead-ends is overall a metaphysically more usable camera for me
The OM line is a stroke of design genius, but I really wish they just went all out on a special edition or something, because both the samples I've owned have felt kinda fragile and clunky in use.
I like the F because of the lack of any electronics, leaving on less thing that can cause a problem. Good luck with your search and come back for advice on lenses.
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?