Nikon F vs F2: fit & finish

[flavio81]

I just wish Olympus had made a meterless variant of the OM1/ OM1n.

They made a winderless variant of the OM1...

Just wait until the wind mecanism gears eventually fail, then you'll have the winderless variant.

 

[flavio81]

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't


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.

Indeed you're right. The Canon 7, while much more ergonomic (viewfinder, parallax correction, easy loading) than a Leica IIF, isn't as well made. Canon did some cheapening down for the 7, compared to previous models.

 

[logan2z]

I love the F/F2. Besides their history, I think the plain prism models are examples of beautiful industrial design. But it's hard for me to reconcile the whole "they're indestructible" notion with the fact that so many of the plain prism models I see have badly dented prism housings. Nikon must have used very soft metal for those housings or users of these cameras are incredibly clumsy.

 

[benjiboy]

One consideration is if you would like T.T.L. metering Madeleine is very few of the light meters in Nikon F and F2s are still in working order many of them are worn out, whereas the meters, in Canon F1s, use a different metering system that's in the camera body that's more accurate, and reliable than the Nikon models and after about thirty years use the majority of them are still working correctly in the long term, that, can't be said for the Nikon F and F 2 models.

 

[Les Sarile]

I love the F/F2. Besides their history, I think the plain prism models are examples of beautiful industrial design. But it's hard for me to reconcile the whole "they're indestructible" notion with the fact that so many of the plain prism models I see have badly dented prism housings. Nikon must have used very soft metal for those housings or users of these cameras are incredibly clumsy.

Of course there is a little difference between destruction and dented. I have acquired many plain prisms from various brand that have no dent at all.

Kodak TMAX 100-19-15 by Les DMess, on Flickr

I'm sure there are many more out there in equally great shape from not so clumsy owners. Afterall, they even used to use those nice leather cases.

 

[Paul Howell]

I love the F/F2. Besides their history, I think the plain prism models are examples of beautiful industrial design. But it's hard for me to reconcile the whole "they're indestructible" notion with the fact that so many of the plain prism models I see have badly dented prism housings. Nikon must have used very soft metal for those housings or users of these cameras are incredibly clumsy.

There are photos of Nikon F that stopped bullets in Vietnam, her is Don McCullin's Nikon, saved his life. So not so clumsy as just really hard use in dangerous environments. I dropped a F with a 50 F2 out of helicopter, fell 300 feet into a rice paddy, we landed and I fished it out. Yeah I was clumsy the film was ruined, luckily I had a M2 for backup. The Nikon was sent back to the states for repairs, somehow it was put back into inventory, or so I was told.

 

[Les Sarile]

That a Nikon F - or for that matter any other camera, can stop a bullet to save your life will require divine intervention or a combination of great fortune, appropriate caliber, angle, distance and additional obstacles just to name a few . . .

 

[Pieter12]

Speaking of indestructible, my camera technician once showed me an F3 that had been used to shoot Space Shuttle take-offs. They were placed in a blast-proof box on stands near the launch pad. Someone had forgotten to properly close the box, and this F3 had been hit by the blasts and was burned. The tech was able to repair it so it was still capable of taking photos--mostly as a conversation piece. It looked like it had been to hell and back.

 

[jimjm]

There are no electronics inside a Nikon F2....

Yeah, the shutter's not electronically controlled but there's more wiring inside the F2. This wouldn't matter if only using the prism finder, but if using any of the metered heads this can be a potential point of failure. Any F2 is still going to be much more robust than any electronic camera coming after it.
Here's a photo of my F2 while Sover was servicing it. He said he found the battery compartment cracked and a corroded contact from a leaking battery.

 

[Huss]

Yeah, the shutter's not electronically controlled but there's more wiring inside the F2. This wouldn't matter if only using the prism finder, but if using any of the metered heads this can be a potential point of failure. Any F2 is still going to be much more robust than any electronic camera coming after it.
Here's a photo of my F2 while Sover was servicing it. He said he found the battery compartment cracked and a corroded contact from a leaking battery.

View attachment 309563

Correct. Strange oversight from a camera tech.

 

[logan2z]

Of course there is a little difference between destruction and dented. I have acquired many plain prisms from various brand that have no dent at all.

Kodak TMAX 100-19-15 by Les DMess, on Flickr

I'm sure there are many more out there in equally great shape

I don't know, it seems like you might have them all

 

[madNbad]

There are photos of Nikon F that stopped bullets in Vietnam, her is Don McCullin's Nikon, saved his life. So not so clumsy as just really hard use in dangerous environments. I dropped a F with a 50 F2 out of helicopter, fell 300 feet into a rice paddy, we landed and I fished it out. Yeah I was clumsy the film was ruined, luckily I had a M2 for backup. The Nikon was sent back to the states for repairs, somehow it was put back into inventory, or so I was told. View attachment 309556

The two most impressive things about this story is first the fact they landed so you could muck around in a rice paddy looking for your camera and secondly, you found it. Great story, thanks!

 

[Paul Howell]

The two most impressive things about this story is first the fact they landed so you could muck around in a rice paddy looking for your camera and secondly, you found it. Great story, thanks!

I had no choice, could take the risk that someone from the Pathet Lao had seen the F drop, recover it along with film. I saw where the camera had landed, it look me a half hour or so to find, was in 6 inches of water but had not been buried in the muck.

 

[__Brian]

One consideration is if you would like T.T.L. metering Madeleine is very few of the light meters in Nikon F and F2s are still in working order many of them are worn out, whereas the meters, in Canon F1s, use a different metering system that's in the camera body that's more accurate, and reliable than the Nikon models and after about thirty years use the majority of them are still working correctly in the long term, that, can't be said for the Nikon F and F 2 models.

All of mine work except a DP-2. That makes Nine working, one not working. The DP-3 and DP-12 use Silicon Photo Diodes, like the Canon F1 New which came out much later. The original Canon F1 (and the slightly revised version) use CDS cells like the Nikon F Photomic meters and DP-1, DP-2, and DP-11. CDS cells can lose sensitivity over time, usually on the lowest end and highest end of the range. The advantage of the Nikon F and F2: you can replace the meter head with ones that works. With the Canon- body needs to be taken apart for the repair.

The meters on my Canon F1 (original version) and Canon EF (The real one, not that AF stuff) work just fine. The latter was $35, missing a screw that was causing wind backlash. Turns out a screw from a Fed-2 worked just fine.

SO- Nikon F and F2, comparable in terms of meter reliability and the Nikon is easier to fix.

Canon 7: I bought a Canon 50/0.95 with a Canon 7 "lens cap". Was cheap, ~$500. The Canon 7 had been dropped so hard that the prism for the framelines sheered at the base "through the glass". Shards everywhere in the mechanism. I cleaned the glass shards out and glued the prism back together, worked fine. Bottom line of the 35mm frame a little fuzzy. The Canon 7 and Canon P sound louder than the earlier cameras, metal foil shutter. Other than not having a cold shoe- no issues. The Canon V series was the last to use gold for the beamsplitters rather than silver, as per cameraquest. The Canon P dropped the linkage for the auto-parallax corrected external finder.

 

[Paul Howell]

I had a 7S and Leica IIIG, used as my second body for years. I found the 7s to have good build quality, not up the IIIG, with more built in frame lines, a useful meter, and hinged film door, I found it was more useful in the field. On the other hand when not in hurry the IIIG was a pleasure to use.

 

[CMoore]

That a Nikon F - or for that matter any other camera, can stop a bullet to save your life will require divine intervention or a combination of great fortune, appropriate caliber, angle, distance and additional obstacles just to name a few . . .

Yes..................SOME people get hit by lightning and live.
However, i would not count on THAT or a Nikon F stopping a bullet .

 

[CMoore]

All of mine work except a DP-2. That makes Nine working, one not working. The DP-3 and DP-12 use Silicon Photo Diodes, like the Canon F1 New which came out much later. The original Canon F1 (and the slightly revised version) use CDS cells like the Nikon F Photomic meters and DP-1, DP-2, and DP-11. CDS cells can lose sensitivity over time, usually on the lowest end and highest end of the range. The advantage of the Nikon F and F2: you can replace the meter head with ones that works. With the Canon- body needs to be taken apart for the repair.

The meters on my Canon F1 (original version) and Canon EF (The real one, not that AF stuff) work just fine. The latter was $35, missing a screw that was causing wind backlash. Turns out a screw from a Fed-2 worked just fine.

SO- Nikon F and F2, comparable in terms of meter reliability and the Nikon is easier to fix.

Canon 7: I bought a Canon 50/0.95 with a Canon 7 "lens cap". Was cheap, ~$500. The Canon 7 had been dropped so hard that the prism for the framelines sheered at the base "through the glass". Shards everywhere in the mechanism. I cleaned the glass shards out and glued the prism back together, worked fine. Bottom line of the 35mm frame a little fuzzy. The Canon 7 and Canon P sound louder than the earlier cameras, metal foil shutter. Other than not having a cold shoe- no issues. The Canon V series was the last to use gold for the beamsplitters rather than silver, as per cameraquest. The Canon P dropped the linkage for the auto-parallax corrected external finder.

I have a pair of Nikon F2s.
Yes, they did visit Sover Wong, but the meters are still "accurate".
A stalwart camera design..................not bullet tested though.

 

[Madeleine Ostoja]

What did Canon do or not do to cheapen the 7? I've been intrigued by this rangefinder for some time but not acted.

The top and bottom plate is thinner than previous models, and there's a lot of room inside the top housing leading to a kinda hollow feeling. The main reason it's larger isn't so much out of necessity as to clear the monstrous f0.95 "dream lens" that it was marketed with.

They're both small things though, my biggest irk with the 7 is the viewfinder design causes a permanent halo around the rangefinder patch, leading to a pretty distracting viewfinder imo. I've blacked out everything that can be blacked out inside mine and it's still flarey. That said, it's still much better than the viewfinder in the P or earlier Canon rangefinders.

The meter is also ugly and usually dead. I ripped mine out and replaced the metering cell and readout with laser cut wood panels, which reduce weight and improved looks (imo)

EDIT: Here's an example of the viewfinder (not my photo), mine is more severe than this irl: https://www.35mmc.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/DSCF2214rs-1024x592.jpg

 

[Pieter12]

I love the F/F2. Besides their history, I think the plain prism models are examples of beautiful industrial design. But it's hard for me to reconcile the whole "they're indestructible" notion with the fact that so many of the plain prism models I see have badly dented prism housings. Nikon must have used very soft metal for those housings or users of these cameras are incredibly clumsy.

The F and F2 were journalism workhorses and took a lot of abuse. They weren't all pampered and to Nikon's credit they continued to function. The downside of that is there are a lot of those cameras on the market that have seen hard use that might take some significant service to be brought up to snuff.

I was at a repair shop not long ago when a young man came in with an F2 and said it was jammed, the film wouldn't advance. The tech took it to his bench and came back in a minute, holding the camera upside down. There was a 1/8" deep dent in the baseplate at one end. The tech said, looks like someone tried to drive a nail with it! The young man then remembered having dropped the camera on a concrete floor.

 

[GregY]

I love the F/F2. Besides their history, I think the plain prism models are examples of beautiful industrial design. But it's hard for me to reconcile the whole "they're indestructible" notion with the fact that so many of the plain prism models I see have badly dented prism housings. Nikon must have used very soft metal for those housings or users of these cameras are incredibly clumsy.

My take on 'indestructible' is that the camera still works. The pentaprism is a pretty exposed feature, and i've seen many dented cameras (not just Nikons) that still function.

 

[GregY]

One consideration is if you would like T.T.L. metering Madeleine is very few of the light meters in Nikon F and F2s are still in working order many of them are worn out, whereas the meters, in Canon F1s, use a different metering system that's in the camera body that's more accurate, and reliable than the Nikon models and after about thirty years use the majority of them are still working correctly in the long term, that, can't be said for the Nikon F and F 2 models.

"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."

In terms of pure design, the modular nature of the F was a turning point in camera concept. Having used both the F/Ftn and the F2/AS at times and found them convenient (shooting Kodachrome with longer lenses).... the F/F2 with a plain prism feels like the smaller and better balanced camera. On that note, I sure liked the almost skeletal feel of the F-36 motordrive. IMO unmatched in feel until the Italian design Nikon F3.

 

[Huss]

The top and bottom plate is thinner than previous models, and there's a lot of room inside the top housing leading to a kinda hollow feeling. The main reason it's larger isn't so much out of necessity as to clear the monstrous f0.95 "dream lens" that it was marketed with.

They're both small things though, my biggest irk with the 7 is the viewfinder design causes a permanent halo around the rangefinder patch, leading to a pretty distracting viewfinder imo. I've blacked out everything that can be blacked out inside mine and it's still flarey. That said, it's still much better than the viewfinder in the P or earlier Canon rangefinders.

The meter is also ugly and usually dead. I ripped mine out and replaced the metering cell and readout with laser cut wood panels, which reduce weight and improved looks (imo)

View attachment 309619

EDIT: Here's an example of the viewfinder (not my photo), mine is more severe than this irl: https://www.35mmc.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/DSCF2214rs-1024x592.jpg

That looks great!

 

[pthornto]

I own 2 F’s and 2 F2’s and they are all great. The F2 definitely feels more modern and smoother in use, but I think I enjoy the gestalt and in-hand feel of the original F just a bit more. They really created a fantastic design with it, so much so that the F2 is clearly iterative. The edges in the F are sharper- I notice It most around the base of the mirror box protruding from the body. Both cameras have that responsiveness that gives you confidence they will go click at the instant you need them too!

 

[madNbad]

The top and bottom plate is thinner than previous models, and there's a lot of room inside the top housing leading to a kinda hollow feeling. The main reason it's larger isn't so much out of necessity as to clear the monstrous f0.95 "dream lens" that it was marketed with.

They're both small things though, my biggest irk with the 7 is the viewfinder design causes a permanent halo around the rangefinder patch, leading to a pretty distracting viewfinder imo. I've blacked out everything that can be blacked out inside mine and it's still flarey. That said, it's still much better than the viewfinder in the P or earlier Canon rangefinders.

The meter is also ugly and usually dead. I ripped mine out and replaced the metering cell and readout with laser cut wood panels, which reduce weight and improved looks (imo)

View attachment 309619

EDIT: Here's an example of the viewfinder (not my photo), mine is more severe than this irl: https://www.35mmc.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/DSCF2214rs-1024x592.jpg

After seeing your Canon, you may be happier with the F.

 

[Les Sarile]

Yes..................SOME people get hit by lightning and live.
However, i would not count on THAT or a Nikon F stopping a bullet .

My in-laws are survivors of a direct lightning hit. Unbelievable story!