Then sent it to me.
Nikon F2 Photomic or Canon F-1n?
-
A
- Thread starter SodaAnt
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale Leica IIIg + Nikkor LTM 50mm f/2.0
- Started by juanj
-
For Sale Yashica T4 Super D with 35mm f/3.5 Zeiss T* lens
- Started by dirkfletcher
-
For Sale Nikon AH-2 Tripod Adapter Accessory
- Started by davela
-
For Sale Schneider Angulon 90 mm, f/6.8 in Copal 0 Shutter
- Started by Keith Pitman
Forum statistics
- Threads
- 188,020
- Messages
- 2,620,968
- Members
- 96,910
- Latest member
- shearerphotography
- Recent bookmarks
- 0
Then sent it to me.
If you see a camera you like, you could ask the seller for a photo of the code.
OP
OP
I agree. All of the cameras I'm looking at are in cosmetically mint condition with no or very minimal brassing. I doubt any cameras used by PJs will look like this (unless eBay sellers repaint cameras to hide brassing).
I'm sure photojournalists care about their cameras.....they just use them as tools. Ask Todd Korol....
I did a bit more digging. It looks like serial numbers have never been used as a reliable date indicator for Canons. Even the date codes above rolled over at some point, so you have to have a general idea of what generation of product you have (not a big deal).
Another reason the be a vintage Nikon shooter - the first two digits of the SN are the year of manufacture
OP
OP
Another reason the be a vintage Nikon shooter - the first two digits of the SN are the year of manufacture
I didn't know that. If that's the case, then many, if not most, F2AS's listed on eBay didn't start out that way because the bodies have serial numbers that start with 71, 74, 75, or something like that and I know the DP-12 wasn't introduced until 1977.
Yeah, I should have said "Nikon Fs" not all legacy cameras. I cannot recall if the Nikormat/Nikkomat cameras followed this scheme.
For the F2 serial numbers, it's not an exact correlation between the first two digits of the serial # and year of manufacture. A good resource is Richard de Stoutz's site here. For example, some 71xxxxx numbers were being made in late '72, and 80xxxxx numbers were made in '78 and '79. It's also very common to find older bodies with later model Photomic finders (and vice-versa), as any DP or prism head will fit on an F2 body from any year.
And of course the Nikon F bodies started with 64xxxxxx numbers in 1959, although they started overlapping with the years in the late '60s and early '70s.
Well, ya learn something new every day. I thought they always were prefixed by year of birth. Sigh, there goes THAT argument for everything Nikon
Those old Nikon bodies just amaze me still. I've used them on- and off since the early 1970s. Today I shoot mostly MF and 4x5 but I have a stable of 5 Nikon film bodies from a Nikormat Ft to an F3. They are all wonderful cameras, but the old Fs and F2s especially are just durable workhorses after thousands and thousands of frames.
I was sitting on a bench one day reloading my (plain prism) F - the first 35mm camera I ever owned - and I stood up without putting the strap around my neck. The camera went flying and hit a concrete path. Minor body scratch and it just kept shooting as if nothing had happened. I don't have that body anymore but it's a testament to the structural integrity of those cameras. I suspect you couldn't build them that way anymore because they'd probably cost $10,000. I mean, even their best digibody that comes in somewhere around $4-5K isn't that tough, I don't think.
OP
OP
Yep. I have the book.
I actually had Mike Drew in mind - he was notoriously hard on cameras. Still worked after he forgot he left it on the roof of the car and it came off at highway speed on a gravel road, but they didn't get cossetted by any means.
Yes, Mike is hard on his equipment, but photojournalists use them as tools. Some are harder on them than others. But
I don't think you can make the assumption that they don't care about their cameras. Do we assume that a carpenters care or don't care about their hammers or skilsaws? There's no doubt IMO that some hobby photographers fetishize their gear....professionals not so much
Sure may do care, but when looking a brassed camera on ebay how to do you know if the former owner cared or was of the "I don't own a screw in it so I don't gave a ****" mindset?
If the camera was obviously looked after it much less likely to have been knocked around, fallen off things etc. That was all, It's better to have an earlier camera that was owned by the stereotypical dentist, than a late one that went through a war - literally.
If the camera was obviously looked after it much less likely to have been knocked around, fallen off things etc. That was all, It's better to have an earlier camera that was owned by the stereotypical dentist, than a late one that went through a war - literally.
From Camera Quest, all of the Apollo mission used Hassy.
F cosmetics changed late in production to match the then currently produced and just introduced F2. The F was updated with a plastic tipped F2 type advance lever and self timer, and stronger camera strap eyelets. The only Apollo variation that I know of is the PC connection. The earlier Apollos had the standard F flash connection. The later ones had the F2 type threaded PC connection. Shown is a black Apollo with the standard prism, F36 motor and cordless battery pack.
Though popularly called the "Apollo" due to the USA Apollo space program of the early 1970's, I have never seen any evidence to link this variation with the space program.
The earliest "Apollo" might be # 7256811 pictured in a Nikon instruction book. Nikon usually brought out a new instruction book with new changes. For some reason the change was actually made much later, probably about 7335000. That would make approximate "Apollo" production about 116,000 cameras--or at least that is my current best guess.
Nikon F "Apollo"
F cosmetics changed late in production to match the then currently produced and just introduced F2. The F was updated with a plastic tipped F2 type advance lever and self timer, and stronger camera strap eyelets. The only Apollo variation that I know of is the PC connection. The earlier Apollos had the standard F flash connection. The later ones had the F2 type threaded PC connection. Shown is a black Apollo with the standard prism, F36 motor and cordless battery pack.
Though popularly called the "Apollo" due to the USA Apollo space program of the early 1970's, I have never seen any evidence to link this variation with the space program.
The earliest "Apollo" might be # 7256811 pictured in a Nikon instruction book. Nikon usually brought out a new instruction book with new changes. For some reason the change was actually made much later, probably about 7335000. That would make approximate "Apollo" production about 116,000 cameras--or at least that is my current best guess.
Craig I absolutely agree that now many years later buying a clean-looking camera gives you a better chance of the innards also being in good shape. We're two weeks into the discussion and on the upside both are inexpensive and were made in large numbers. Both Ebay/Paypal & N. American camera stores offer sufficient buyer protection to lead to a successful purchase outcome.
Well, ya learn something new every day. I thought they always were prefixed by year of birth. Sigh, there goes THAT argument for everything Nikon
Those old Nikon bodies just amaze me still. I've used them on- and off since the early 1970s. Today I shoot mostly MF and 4x5 but I have a stable of 5 Nikon film bodies from a Nikormat Ft to an F3. They are all wonderful cameras, but the old Fs and F2s especially are just durable workhorses after thousands and thousands of frames.
I was sitting on a bench one day reloading my (plain prism) F - the first 35mm camera I ever owned - and I stood up without putting the strap around my neck. The camera went flying and hit a concrete path. Minor body scratch and it just kept shooting as if nothing had happened. I don't have that body anymore but it's a testament to the structural integrity of those cameras. I suspect you couldn't build them that way anymore because they'd probably cost $10,000. I mean, even their best digibody that comes in somewhere around $4-5K isn't that tough, I don't think.
Totally agree with you, Chuck. One of my favorite things about the F and F2 bodies is that they really were built to take a beating and still keep working. I happen to think the Canon F-1 falls in this same category. It's still easy to find repair folks who can service the F and F2 shutters, and that's the only problem I've ever really seen after having owned about a dozen of each. Just a standard CLA will keep many going for another 20 years.
I have one black F2 I bought a few years ago as a parts body and was advertised as "not-working" for $40. KEH would rate this as Ugly, and it looks like it was used hard. Came with a working DP-1 finder, but I put an equally ugly F prism finder on it (with decent glass). The film chamber is immaculate inside even though the exterior is all brassed and dented. The shutter is perfect and very accurate. I'm guessing this may have been professionally used, but it got serviced once or twice a year. It's smoother than any other camera I've owned.
Sometimes the clean pristine cameras are not always a sure bet. Ones that were bought by collectors and never used, or had problems from the get-go (and were never used) are still out there.
Clean late F2AS w box on Rangefinder Forum.......
.I can't talk about the Nikon, never had that model, but I can talk about the Canon F1n. Presently I own/use two Canon F1ns. Years ago when I was a working photographer I choose the Canon F1n as my primary 35 camera. I like the weight and solid feel. When equipped with the AE prism finder everything in producing an image works right. I have one on Canon's power winder FN. Never had a failure in the field under varying conditions.
That would be the F-1N.
Did we all settle on the Canon F-1n? 
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |