Nikon F3.....HP

[CMoore]

I have always heard that the HP was designed to accommodate people (photographers I suppose) that wore glasses.
1. Is that true.?
2. I do not think I have "ever" heard this applied to any other camera, not before or since. I sure could be wrong, I am new to photography.
But.....I do not recall the Canon A-1 or F-1 having a camera variant that was made for eye glasses. I do not recall the Nikon F2 or F4 trying to address the "problem" of shooters that had to use glasses.
Am I right...why was Nikon concerned about this with the F3.?
Thank You

 

[Les Sarile]

HP - High eye point or = longer eye relief = smaller viewfinder magnification = more distance between eyeballs and viewfinder which is better for people who wear glasses.
The plain F3 with the DE-2 finder has a magnification of 0.8X while the HP has the DE-3 with an even smaller magnification of 0.75X.

 

[CMoore]

Yes, I understand what you are saying.
I guess my real question is.....Why this camera, why the F3.?
What about the cameras that came before and after. I do not see it addressed with any other camera.

 

[Chan Tran]

The F3 was one of those with interchangeable viewfinder (like all other F series model except the F6) and this feature is not common. Nikon introduced the HP version which is exactly the same camera except the viewfinder and people seem to like it including people who don't wear eye glasses. So the newer F series camera all have high eye point viewfinder.

 

[Les Sarile]

Yes, I understand what you are saying.
I guess my real question is.....Why this camera, why the F3.?
What about the cameras that came before and after. I do not see it addressed with any other camera.

Of course none of the other cameras you listed have interchangeable viewfinders and therefore have the compromise of magnification somewhere in between to accommodate people who wear glasses and those who don't.

 

[Les Sarile]

So the newer F series camera all have high eye point viewfinder.

If by newer you mean the autofocus types then it doesn't really matter much to people who prefer large magnification (less eye relief) for better critical focus since the AF addresses that.

 

[Theo Sulphate]

The F2's have interchangeable metering heads, so I don't think Nikon would've made an HP variant due to costs. Also, and more likely, I don't think they perceived eyepoint relief as being an issue.

On my F3/T's, which automatically have an HP finder, I can see the image area and the surrounding readouts. On my F4's, with the standard finder, I can see all this as well - to me it's equivalent to the HP finder. There is a DP-20 "action finder" for the F4 which let's you use the camera with goggles or a helmet.

 

[Les Sarile]

The Pentax LX has the most variations of viewfinders with magnifications ranging from a minimum of 0.55X to greater then lifesize at 1.35X depending on the prism used.

 

[bdial]

I bought my F3 before the HP finder was introduced, and later bought an HP finder. I didn't notice much difference, but with the HP you don't have to move your eye around quite as much to see everything wearing glasses.

Maybe it will be an excuse to buy another F3 body so I can do a side by side comparison.

 

[Alan W]

Try a Canon F1 with a speedfinder.Same kind of effect.You can keep your eye back a couple of inches or more and still see everything clearly in the viewfinder.

 

[Chan Tran]

If by newer you mean the autofocus types then it doesn't really matter much to people who prefer large magnification (less eye relief) for better critical focus since the AF addresses that.

I meant the F4, F5 and F6 all have high eye point finder.

 

[cuthbert]

Yes, while the F3 had the HP head Canon and Pentax offered action finder with even more eye relief and smaller magnification. Also their viewfinders can be rotated and they are more flexible than the plain HP prism.

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

I wear glasses and to me it's a huge difference between the HP viewfinder and their standard one. Love the HP.

 

[miha]

F90 and F100 (N in the USA) have HP as well.
Canon speedfinder is different to HP and similar to sports finder from Nikon:
https://www.flickr.com/groups/18787520@N00/discuss/72157611965918251/

 

[MartinCrabtree]

The Pentax LX has the most variations of viewfinders with magnifications ranging from a minimum of 0.55X to greater then lifesize at 1.35X depending on the prism used.

Dammit Les I had just about forgotten I want one of those damn things and you go and do that.

 

[Mick Fagan]

I have always heard that the HP was designed to accommodate people (photographers I suppose) that wore glasses.
1. Is that true.?
2. I do not think I have "ever" heard this applied to any other camera, not before or since. I sure could be wrong, I am new to photography.
But.....I do not recall the Canon A-1 or F-1 having a camera variant that was made for eye glasses. I do not recall the Nikon F2 or F4 trying to address the "problem" of shooters that had to use glasses.
Am I right...why was Nikon concerned about this with the F3.?
Thank You

I think part of the answer is that the F3 arrived on the scene at a time when professional photographers shooting for magazines and stock photography in colour and with transparency film were high on the list of what professional photographers were shooting. As the in camera film became the selling product, having a clean and correctly framed subject in your image was a great thing.

Another thing that helped, was that the viewfinder screen allows the photographer to see 100% of the image burnt to the film. Many photographers worked outdoors all day, think athletic meetings, motor vehicle racing, even the landscape photographer submitting squillions of images for stock photography, worked outdoors all day.

In bright sunshine all day and every day at work, one invariably wears sunglasses. The High eyePoint (HP) prism housing, let professional photographers wear spectacles of any kind, yet still see the entire image they were taking.

The HP version was first offered as an alternative, but the uptake was so great, the original prism head was hardly ever stocked. I purchased my first F3 and had the option of picking up the, then new, HP prism viewfinder, which I did. Best viewfinder I have ever used on a 135 camera.

As an aside, a couple of years ago in Germany, I picked up some small Leica binoculars that have a push/pull HP setting for spectacle wearers or non-spectacle wearers. Same deal as the F3 HP, spectacular spectacle usage.

 

[John_Nikon_F]

Yes, while the F3 had the HP head Canon and Pentax offered action finder with even more eye relief and smaller magnification. Also their viewfinders can be rotated and they are more flexible than the plain HP prism.

Nikon F had the action finder. Non-rotatable, but, IIRC, it was the first with an action finder, since the F-1 didn't come out until the early '70s, and the LX was much later.

To get back to the original question, everything from the F3HP through the F6 has the .75x magnification and high eyepoint. IIRC, even the N8008, N90, F100, and all the higher end & pro d____l bodies have it.

-J

 

[CMoore]

Yeah...I See.
So it kind of Started With The F3...then continued on.
Perhaps more 'fanfare' was made of the F3 (with HP nomenclature) because it was the first to concentrate on that issue.
Years later, I come along and think it was some anomaly unique to the F3.
Thank You All

 

[flavio81]

. I do not think I have "ever" heard this applied to any other camera, not before or since. I sure could be wrong, I am new to photography.
But.....I do not recall the Canon A-1 or F-1 having a camera variant that was made for eye glasses. I do not recall the Nikon F2 or F4 trying to address the "problem" of shooters that had to use glasses.

The F-1 (all versions) have more or less high eyepoint (definitely higher compared to the amateur cameras like the A-series or the FT-models), i don't think that using them with glasses is any problem.

As mentioned by cuthbert, both Canon and Pentax offered "sports finders", in particular the one on the Canon has way way way way higher eyepoint than the one in the F3. But of course it is bigger.

I owned the regular F3 and i found the viewfinder excellent. However i did not like to use the tiny "+/-" display for metering. I sold the F3.

The F2 viewfinder, at least in the F2A and F2AS, is equally big and clear, no improvement on the regular F3. The match needle metering on those two is far better than in the F3.

 

[Mick Fagan]

As mentioned by cuthbert, both Canon and Pentax offered "sports finders", in particular the one on the Canon has way way way way higher eyepoint than the one in the F3. But of course it is bigger.

The F3 does have an Action Finder, called the DA-2. I have one and it is terrific if you are wearing a motorcycle helmet, or safety goggles in an industrial setting, which is why I purchased that finder. You can see virtually the entire viewfinder image with your eye about 60-70mm away. I have used my DA-2 finder underground in mines wearing thick goggles, sitting backwards on motorcycles wearing a helmet, through an arc welding helmet waiting for an arc to be struck before I could see anything, (one of the hardest things I have ever tried to shoot, until we set the camera up then I waited until the welding rod passed in front the viewfinder).

A very large viewfinder that enables you to see the image from a relatively great distance, has a distinct advantage over a normal viewfinder in many instances.

Mick.

 

[cuthbert]

The F3 does have an Action Finder, called the DA-2. I have one and it is terrific if you are wearing a motorcycle helmet, or safety goggles in an industrial setting, which is why I purchased that finder. You can see virtually the entire viewfinder image with your eye about 60-70mm away. I have used my DA-2 finder underground in mines wearing thick goggles, sitting backwards on motorcycles wearing a helmet, through an arc welding helmet waiting for an arc to be struck before I could see anything, (one of the hardest things I have ever tried to shoot, until we set the camera up then I waited until the welding rod passed in front the viewfinder).

A very large viewfinder that enables you to see the image from a relatively great distance, has a distinct advantage over a normal viewfinder in many instances.

Mick.

This one?

It looks like it's fixed, and a little too bulky for my taste. I think that Canon's:

And Pentax's:

Are more useful and elegant.

 

[CMoore]

Wow.....great photos...AND you put the apostrophes in the right place(s).

 

[fstop]

I bought my F3 before the HP finder was introduced, and later bought an HP finder. I didn't notice much difference, but with the HP you don't have to move your eye around quite as much to see everything wearing glasses.

Maybe it will be an excuse to buy another F3 body so I can do a side by side comparison.

By all means do a test, it will satisfy any GAS you have. I have HP and DE2 finders, I prefer the DE2.

 

[Mick Fagan]

This one?

It looks like it's fixed, and a little too bulky for my taste. I think that Canon's:

And Pentax's:

Are more useful and elegant.

Short answer, yes, that one.

The Pentax unit is a great system viewfinder concept, you interchange the rear end with either a standard finder at 45º, or a close up finder at 45º, or the action finder at 90º. They can be convenient, they can be swiveled (if my memory is correct) but I must confess I have never seen any of them in the flesh being used. I did see one at a trade show, but the price in this country was phenomenal and to be honest I think Pentax sort of missed the boat with manual focus professional bodies, something I never really understood as Pentax sold absolutely squillions of cameras compared to Canon and Nikon. Perhaps there was more money to be made catering to the mass amateur market than the professional market, I just don't know.

The Canon system on the New F1 was probably the most interesting, I have used this system of viewfinders and did like it.

The action viewfinder for the F3 is bigger and better for the worst possible shooting situations, that is from my own personal experience. Comparing only the Nikon and Canon here as I have never seen the Pentax unit fitted with these viewfinders being used.

Mick.

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

Yes, the big HP raised eyebrows just it raised the profile of arm muscles. I was aware it was designed for people who wore glasses (I didn't then, but do now!), and the big viewfinder offered a commanding view of the world. Sorrowfully, the Nikon F3 HP, which I owned in 1984 and carried in the big blue Karrimor handlebar bag of my touring bike around Australia, took itself to the murky bottom of the Gordon River in Tasmania in the finishing stages of the long solo tour, when I was hanging over the side to get a rearward view and was 'bumped' by the wake of a passing boat. Lad (and F3) overboard! I can swim (I recall the water as being dark and fekking cold...), but the big camera sank like a lead weight into the gloom, repleat with that giant MD-4 motordrive and 28mm Nikkor. The following year I lost my first OM4, run over by a car when the rear-rack bag came adrift on the tandem at speed. Thems were the worst years for camera tragedies...