Nikon F3 vs F2 (My thoughts so far...)

[BrianShaw]

Define "Pro". That's the gist of the problem. They weren't all hunting the same kind of subject matter, or all making their living doing exactly the same thing, so inevitably had somewhat different opinions about what potentially constituted the best equipment with the most relevant features. But even if you had two pros doing the very same kind of shooting, discussing it in the same room, they'd probably have divergences of personal preference, along with ergonomic proclivities.

EXACTLY. For the very short period of time when I used a camera professionally, about 10 years, meaning that I was getting paid to use a camera in the performance of paid employment, I used Nikkormats on the job and a F3 for recreation.

 

[CMoore]

EXACTLY. For the very short period of time when I used a camera professionally, about 10 years, meaning that I was getting paid to use a camera in the performance of paid employment, I used Nikkormats on the job and a F3 for recreation.

Why was that.?
Just curious.
I was never a pro and had a 30 year gap in my photo hobby, so i am still catching up on A LOT of stuff.

 

[BrianShaw]

Why was that.?
Just curious.
I was never a pro and had a 30 year gap in my photo hobby, so i am still catching up on A LOT of stuff.

We worked in a variety of extremely challenging situations including underground mines and military tactical environments doing engineering assessment and data collection. The Nikkormats were very robust and affordable, to buy, replace and have overhauled. For the mining work we had them overhauled about every 80 hours of use. I’m not sure if a F3 would have survived as well in those circumstances. As for my personal use camera… I had a lot of available resources at the time.

 

[GregY]

Brian, I had one Nikkormat and despite their toughness I never caught on to them. I still love the industrial feel of the F36 motordrive. I used the F3 with a motordrive for heli-ski photography. That with the 80-200 f2.8 were money makers.

 

[BrianShaw]

Brian, I had one Nikkormat and despite their toughness I never caught on to them. I still love the industrial feel of the F36 motordrive. I used the F3 with a motordrive for heli-ski photography. That with the 80-200 f2.8 were money makers.

I’m sure that’s true!

This helps “prove” Drew’s point about the great diversity of needs and opinions and experiences of professional photographers.

 

[Huss]

I've always found it interesting when people use the experience and preferences of professional photographers as a guide when recommending a camera.
Over the years, I dealt with a lot of different users of cameras. People with all sorts of interests, levels of experience and requirements. And it was always clear to me that the pro level equipment was often much better suited to the experienced and very demanding professional than it was to most serious amateurs, even when the price difference didn't matter.
And as for the sales and longevity of F2 vs. F3 models? That was as much due to the expectations of the times as anything else. When you compare the times - F2 being current vs. F3 being current - one major difference was that during the F3's time there were many more areas of photography where the clients and customers who bought product from professional photographers were likely to accept the quality that then current 35mm film offered - the films were that much improved.
In addition, I would suggest that the sort of professional photography that makes/made use of 35mm film was the sort of photography where the practitioners tended to be younger, rather than older. The F3 was designed for the new photographers of its time. I would suggest that the F2 was designed as much as a needed upgrade for the older photographers who had been using the F as it was for the newer photographers coming into the profession.
All of this is of course speaking in generalities. I knew older photographers who happily upgraded to and really liked the F3, as well as younger photographer who sought out the F2 at the time of transition to the F3. But mostly, I encountered younger photographers who would never have considered the F, the F2 or the F3, because they had no use for their capabilities or complexities.

Perhaps you misunderstand me? I was responding to those claiming the F3 was a poor pro camera because it only has one mechanical speed etc.

 

[Cholentpot]

All these complaints about the F3 about not having proper pro camera features is very funny given the commentators.

What matters is was the F3 accepted by pros? Not only was it embraced, but if far outsold all the other cameras which some commentators claim are the real pro cameras.
Apparently pros did not agree. The F3 was so good Nikon continued to make it even when they made the F5!
But the peanut gallery here? Not a pro camera as only one manual shutter speed!

I'm just here enjoying the elders fighting over technicalities and disappointments of a half century ago.

The F3 has nearly 50 years of an amazing track record. Nitpicking some issues from 1981 Camera & Gear editorial section is refighting the war. No-one cares how bitter you were when the camera came out because of X Y and Z. It's the same group of sour guys that still won't touch Canon because they switched from FD to EF. Get over it. My generations sour patch is the switch from mirror to no mirror. I don't like it but I'll learn to live with it.

 

[MattKing]

Perhaps you misunderstand me? I was responding to those claiming the F3 was a poor pro camera because it only has one mechanical speed etc.

No, I understood you. Your post was just a good one to choose as a stepping off point for a comment about using the varying interests and concerns of pro photographers over the decades as a bellwether for these sort of discussions.

 

[Roger Cole]

Here's a question for all you manual meter users on electronic cameras...if you are shooting manual mode yet using the in-built meter for metering and simply turn the wheel till the needle matches...how is that different from A mode? And maybe some exposure lock if you need to adjust?

Because you aim the screen, with the metering pattern in mind (total averaging, center weighted, center-bottom weighted, whatever your camera has, you should know) and set the exposure, then you recompose without regard for how that changes the exposure. It is not different, in that case, from autoexposure with memory lock.

I have a Pentax LX, an excellent camera in all other regards but lacking the exposure lock, so I almost always shot with it in manual mode and for reasons I could never quite put my finger on I tended to prefer my MX. I put that in past tense because after I got into medium format I all but stopped shooting 35mm at all.

Now that's assuming you're just going to meter the scene and shoot what the meter says. As others above say, manual mode lets you see what the meter says and then easily clock a bit each way or whatever. And it's also leaving aside the later TTL metering that used electronic metering zones and evaluative metering.

For the way I shoot exposure memory lock was always the best/easiest for me way to use autoexposure and I've always considered it a glaring lack in an otherwise excellent camera that my LX lacks it. But the LX meter IS excellent, even close to being evaluative. I'm not sure how they did it, and I'd have to go back and read up on it now anyway, but it is excellent. But in practice I actually prefer shooting with my MX for whatever reason. Well preferred - as I said, I pretty much gave up 35mm. I may go back to it for some things.

 

[Roger Cole]

I'm just here enjoying the elders fighting over technicalities and disappointments of a half century ago.

The F3 has nearly 50 years of an amazing track record. Nitpicking some issues from 1981 Camera & Gear editorial section is refighting the war. No-one cares how bitter you were when the camera came out because of X Y and Z. It's the same group of sour guys that still won't touch Canon because they switched from FD to EF. Get over it. My generations sour patch is the switch from mirror to no mirror. I don't like it but I'll learn to live with it.

You do realize you're on the analog, aka "film" section of Photrio, yes?

 

[BMbikerider]

At sometime I have used all the 'Pro' versions made by Nikon with the exception of the F5 (too heavy) and they were all, very good. Between the F2a's that I owned (3 or 4 - I forget) and the F3's (2 x F3hp) I would go for the F2a every time. It was as bomb proof as they get. It gave the impression that little short of a direct hit from a HE shell would stop it working. The F3 was probably technologically better, more advanced electronically. but gave me the impression of not being as robust.

I think that this can be supported by the numbers of F2 cameras still functioning perfectly over the number of F3 models. I don't know about the rest of the world, but for every F 3 models still working and working well in UK and for sale, you will find many more F2's (or for that matter, even the original 'F'.)

The F3 was a very good camera, but with hindsight, this appears to be almost a development stepping stone between the F2 and the F4 where Nikon looked at the longevity and endurance of the F3 electronics, then took the gloves off and made the F4. It wasn't that long after production of the F3 stopped, then the spares situation with the electronics started to dry up. Electronics are and always will be the Achilles heel for cameras, but the F2 will function perfectly well because the only electronics are in the meter. However even the metering electronics are being remanufactured thanks to Mr Sover Wong. I cannot think of any other camera where this has happened, such is the following of the F2.

Over the other manufacturers, Professional cameras that were given a hammering by the press etc, non have stood the test of time as well as the F2. Forget about the Canon F1, F1n, all of the Canon Eos models, compared against the F2 they are simply toast.

(Oooops! I think I may upset some folks with the last sentence, but it is true!)

 

[film_man]

JMO, but as a "manual shooter".........................i would say a beginner in photography would do just as you say.
After you shoot fro awhile, however, the meter becomes a tool that we interpret MUCH More often and do not (always) just choose the setting it would have picked in auto mode.
my 2 cents, adjusted for inflation

Ok fair enough. As a beginner of 20+ years shooting film with all sorts of manual and electronic cameras, I feel that I know the meters of each camera well enough to point where the light is what I want it to be, exposure lock, reframe and done. So this way I can exclude bright lights or deal with back light or whatever and am ready for the next shot where I may or may not need to adjust exposure. I guess how you do things is a function of what the camera lets you do, for example on Canon EF cameras I can just turn a wheel with my thumb and adjust exposure up/down there and then without ever bothering with manual shooting.

But whatever works for people.

 

[Helge]

Very extensive and informative list for sure!

I have the Modern or Popular Photography magazine of the F3 review from when they used to completely breakdown the camera to the components. I recall they had discussions with Nikon about the life span of the LCD and apparently at that time they weren't sure how long (months?) and therefore made it simple to replace. Obviously we're well beyond that expected life but both mine are good and I don't recall ever seeing that issue mentioned much - if at all. Anyone here experience that failure?

Uhm, yeah! It’s the single most complained about PoF.
If it’s easy to change it I’d like to know how, and get a guide.
I have a beat up donor and a mint F3 with a fading display.
It’s probably just the connector.
But it seems to be absolutely a secret how to fix it.
If it even is something a novice should try.

 

[Cholentpot]

You do realize you're on the analog, aka "film" section of Photrio, yes?

Ja.

However I feel my example is appropriate to the conversation. And mirrorless film cameras exist.

 

[flavio81]

I was an enthusiastic user when the F3 came out… and still using mine. It seems rather silly to attempt to relitigate history, but that seems par for the course on the internet.

EDIT: and I picked up an FE about 10 years ago, which I often grab when I grab a 35mm camera. It’s a dandy camera!

Of course.

Last year I sold my last F3.

Yesterday I sold my F2SB, my last F2. I loved it, but it was very heavy...

I'm keeping my mint FE as my sole Nikon camera for now. The FE will stay.

 

[flavio81]

Forget about the Canon F1, F1n, all of the Canon Eos models, compared against the F2 they are simply toast.

(Oooops! I think I may upset some folks with the last sentence, but it is true!)

Toasts are delicious, have you tried one?

And yes, you're telling this in a room with a guy who is wearing a "Canon F-1" t-shirt -- me. (Seriously, literally).

Nikon F2 is probably the greatest all-mechanical 35mm SLR, although the Leicaflex and some Alpas are strong contenders. As well as the Exaktas.

 

[Huss]

No, I understood you. Your post was just a good one to choose as a stepping off point for a comment about using the varying interests and concerns of pro photographers over the decades as a bellwether for these sort of discussions.

Gotcha.
When 99% of pros now use digicams, there is very little reason to pick a pro camera nowadays because you 'need' the toughness, mechanical shutter speeds etc.
even if you make money using film cameras today, chances are you are not going to be in the trenches.

I use 'pro' cameras, and amateur cameras picking which ones pretty much based on whether I find them enjoyable to use. I don't care about battery reliance as I have always run out of film before I have run out of batteries!

 

[BradS]

... I don't care about battery reliance as I have always run out of film before I have run out of batteries!

I always get a chuckle when people reject a great camera simply because it is "battery dependent". People will carry twenty rolls of film but cannot be bothered to carry an extra battery or two? Similarly with the wide spread fear of electronics...too funny.

 

[GregY]

This discussion reminds me of the old Certs ad "Certs is a candy mint. Certs is a breath mint. STOP. You're both right."
Especially vis-a-vis the run up prices on point-and-shoot cameras, a working Nikon F2 or F3 for under $200 (Ebay prices) is a heck of a deal for a reliable pro level film camera.....that accepts such a wide variety of Nikkor lenses.

 

[Huss]

I always get a good chuckle when people reject a great camera that is "battery dependent". People will carry twenty rolls of film but cannot be bothered to carry an extra battery or two? Similarly with the wide spread fear of electronics...too funny.

This is why I like wind up cars that run on spring tension. Do not need gas or electricity like those loser amateur cars.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Brad. Too bad you can't talk to some of my ole expedition friends for whom battery failure was a chronic issue. You can't just change a battery clinging onto an ice wall or with fingers that will go stiff instantly ungloved in the Arctic. And when you do change em out, they don't last long unless re-warmed. I've had battery problems in very cold weather even up there in Sierra high country. Somewhere I've got a remote battery cable for my Pentax 67, to keep the battery warm in a pocket if necessary. I think Nikon offers remote cables too. But during my most rambunctious years, I was shooting strictly view cameras anyway. Keeping a handheld light meter in a pocket is fairly easy, and after years and years of experience in certain lighting, correct exposure can almost be memorized.

And sensitive electronics around severe electrical storms? I've sure been in a lot of those. And for that reason too, and instances of complete camera failure, I've known those who went back to strictly all-mechanical Nikons, which function correctly if needed with no battery at all.

PS - hope the smoke isn't getting to you. My nephew lives near Hwy 49 just south of Mariposa and had to evacuate. But being near the highway, it's a fairly defensible property, and so far, OK. But the ridge right behind them is going wild.

 

[BrianShaw]

Wonderful bedtime stories but let’s face it…extremes well beyond 3 sigma.

 

[Cholentpot]

This is why I like wind up cars that run on spring tension. Do not need gas or electricity like those loser amateur cars.

Phht.

Foot powered.

 

[logan2z]

Phht.

Foot powered.

That has its downsides too...

 

[BradS]

Well @DREW WILEY , I guess that in such extreme environments both electrical and mechanical designs (not to mention optical) would require special considerations.

Smoke hasn't been too bad. We've had a few mornings with moderate smoke and falling ash but it seems to blow out in the afternoons when the winds shift around. All-in-all it's been a real lovely summer so far. We even had a touch of rain early this morning.