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

[Cholentpot]

That has its downsides too...

Self repairing brake pads.

 

[Chan Tran]

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

But camera like the F3 although electronically controlled it's spring powered too.

 

[Roger Cole]

Ja.

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

Sure. I have a 4x5 Technika. But somehow I don't think view cameras are what you mean.

 

[Roger Cole]

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

Yup. If the temperature is below freezing I'm not going to be outside longer than I have to be. I'm a complete... well whatever, I hate cold. HATE it. Heck, I'm not too likely to be outside under 50F anymore. Those examples are fine reasons why someone on an arctic or antarctic expedition, or even up in the high mountains, need to avoid battery dependency. But for the rest of us, it's just not a big deal.

The failure of older electronics and inability to repair or have them repaired due to parts issues is a rather different matter.

 

[BMbikerider]

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.

I feel being 'battery dependant ' is not the real problem, it is the actual electronics. When they are working they are damn good but they can fail at the click of your fingers. Getting spares is usually a matter of cannibalising another broken camera, but with a different fault. Of the mainstream Nikon Pro cameras it is probably only the F6 has adequate spares - but for how long?

Sorry this has taken things a bit off topic and I didn't mean to drift.

 

[flavio81]

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.

Exactly... And two LR44 cells are tiny, even compared to a Minox film cassette!!

 

[flavio81]

I feel being 'battery dependant ' is not the real problem, it is the actual electronics. When they are working they are damn good but they can fail at the click of your fingers. Getting spares is usually a matter of cannibalising another broken camera, but with a different fault. Of the mainstream Nikon Pro cameras it is probably only the F6 has adequate spares - but for how long?

Sorry this has taken things a bit off topic and I didn't mean to drift.

We already have discussions on that topic, feel invited to see:

observation on camera reliability

I am in the fortune position to own dozens of cameras. Many are mechanical ,some are electronic, some only a few years old, Some are many decades old(my oldest will be 100 next year), some frequently used, others I've been sitting on the shelf for years. I made a few interesting observations I...

www.photrio.com

Thought experiment: What if electronically controled cameras are actually no less reliable

The general wisdom for decades is, that electronically control cameras fail easily, and that with no spare parts anymore, that there will be no way to fix them. Eventually in the coming decades there shall be a mountain of 1980s-2000s cameras that all failed, and the robust mechanical cameras of...

www.photrio.com

 

[Cholentpot]

Sure. I have a 4x5 Technika. But somehow I don't think view cameras are what you mean.

My Signet 50 and Vito II don't have mirror either. Nor does my Crown or Century Graphic. I don't think my Instax cameras have mirrors or any of my sub miniature 16mm. XA2? nope. Mju? Nope. The box of point and shoots? Nope.

But you're right. That's not what I meant. I was using the current shift as an example of how things move akin to the shift from FD to EF. Some people like me that are used to the mirror are unhappy and will cling on as long as we can. Will I gripe about it in 40 years? Probably not. I'm sure there are some salty people out there that are invested in the EF system that will still moan about it long after the new system proves itself worthy.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Brad - Not so much mechanical issues with the classic manual cameras. Generally no need for winterization unless the camera has automated features. I began with a simple Pentax H1 and never had an issue until I took a good dunking with it when I lost a coin toss as to who was going to carry the rope across a badly swollen stream of ice melt. Pentax dried it out and it worked fine afterwards. The famous Himalayan photographer Shirakawa used early Pentax Spotmatics. I equipped my nephew with a simple little Pentax MX for for extreme climbs in the Arctic, Patagonia, Himalayas, and K2 area of the Karakoram. Worked fine except for the meter battery needing frequent change due to the cold. A superstar 8000 meter plus Himalayan climber I knew swore by FM2n's, and regretted experimenting with anything fancier.

Glad you haven't gotten much smoke. We can barely smell it here on the coast, and even that is all getting blown away as the wind moves back in from the Ocean. It's horrible in the Mariposa and Yosemite area and well to the south, and over in Mono Basin. Satellites were showing the plume nearly to Utah following the Hwy 80 corridor. Now he direction has shifted somewhat. All that dead miserable beetle-killed "yellow" pine has a huge pitch content. People who burn that in their fireplaces during the winter often lose their cabins due due to all the flammable creosote buildup in their chimneys. Lower elevation "Digger pines" are also bad in that respect.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Brian - Bedtime stories? Not around here. Serious outdoorsmen and techie careers are not mutually exclusive. And just about every big brand name of outdoor gear you can think of started right here, and people remember that, even though it's now mostly imported junk instead. The original Sierra Designs store was right across the tracks from my office. The factory was down the road, which a friend of mine later bought. North Face started here, Marmot, Class V, Royal Robbins, Black Diamond. Seems everybody knew everyone else. North Face sponsored some of my nephew's expeditions, so did Sierra Designs. That wasn't chump change, and they expected something in return, namely, having their own logo "coincidentally" show up on a jacket sleeve or tent in a number of shots. Many of these extreme climbers counted on pictures from their ventures for serious added income, or did lectures including a slide shows, which tended to be heavily attended.

Nothing hypothetical or quaint about it. And that's still somewhat the case. Most of the manufacturing has moved elsewhere, but not what you call "bedtime stories". Gosh, just stumble into a mountain breakfast joint escaping an unseasonable blizzard, and besides the coffee, people will be huddled around talking about the best boots, tents, and yes, cameras. Making a film convert out of a digi junkie is easier than you might think.

When burglars broke into the local camera store just before the pandemic, they didn't take just the latest digital SLR'S. Seems they homed in on the classic used Nikon case even more; took everything. Somebody knew what they were doing. Even lots of local beginners buy older manual cameras that have earned a reputation for "bedtime stories" of their own. Nothing classic Nikon stays on the sales shelf very long at all.

Call me Pleistocene if you want. My work nickname was "Rubble Without A Cause", referring both to the Flintstones and the famous James Dean movie.

 

[Huss]

Phht.

Foot powered.

What are you, a cave man?

 

[BradS]

@DREW WILEY, You remind me of a Pentax H1a with a very lovely 50mm f/1.4 Super Takumar I had years ago. I used to carry it in an unpadded fanny pack slung cross chest, bandolier style, while hauling ass across open desert on a motorcycle (when I was young and dumb). Beating though the brush in the chaparral will eat the leather right off a good pair of boots after a couple hundred miles. I took that camera with me everywhere. Captured a lot of fine memories. It never gave any issues - not even a wimper...although I did have Wally up in Walnut creek service it once (was it Apex camera repair? on Boulevard way?...Yeah, I think that was it. It was just Wally and the old German guy). I regret giving the camera (and lens!!!) to a guy I thought was a friend but who turned out to be just a real smooth shister. Meh. Bygones.

Anyway, yeah...those tiny button cells are no match for even modestly low temps. Hiking in the mountains in June can give them fits - and that's far from an extreme environment. The nice thing about the Nikon F3 is that, if you don't mind lugging the extra weight/bulk, the F3 can be powered by the AA batteries in the motor drive - which have no problem powering the camera even in freezing weather. The button cells are not needed at all.

I have several grey pines in my yard. They're wonderful trees while they're upright. They produce a lot of food for the squirrels and birds. A very fine turpentine can be made from their sap - if one is so inclined. And, of course, the seeds can be made into a sort of flour that is quite edible. The trees are messy - always shedding branches and dropping their massive pine cones..and, yeah they burn very, very well - too well. I have to pick up and burn (outdoor burn pile) all the dead branches and pine cones every year before fire season . I only burn oak or almond (and sometimes a little cedar for kindling) in the woodstove though - never pine. I don't need to court a chimney/attic fire.

 

[DREW WILEY]

A lot of dead ornamental scotch pine is being cleared around the reservoir over the hill from me. It's all the eucalyptus on the hill that our local terrible fire hazard. None close to me, fortunately. My sister down around Monterey nearly had to evacuate there when some nut case set off a couple of eucalyptus grove fires not far away. Lucky she didn't have to leave, cause that's where her son and daughter-in-law are holing up until they can get back to Mariposa.
I had a huge leaning valley oak over 350 yrs old which had no doubt looked like that even in Indian village days there. It was beside the spring which became our first well - blasted out of granite about ten feet in diameter, prior to modern drilling rigs. That tree finally snapped right down into the wellhead. The usual remedy - invite neighbors over with their big chainsaws and winches, and offer them half the oak wood for free.

I still have my old 55mm Pentax screw-mount lens lying around somewhere. Wanted the same look with my Nikon, so was lucky to stumble onto a pristine 50/f2 single-coated S lens already Ai'd, for only about $75. Modern Nikon optics can be just too contrasty sometimes. But I shoot 35mm so seldom it's not a big deal to me. Mostly use the classic 85/1.4 Ai lens on it. Can't think of any other Nikon lens I'd rather have.

 

[Cholentpot]

What are you, a cave man?

I'm a Winston man.

 

[Roger Cole]

My Signet 50 and Vito II don't have mirror either. Nor does my Crown or Century Graphic. I don't think my Instax cameras have mirrors or any of my sub miniature 16mm. XA2? nope. Mju? Nope. The box of point and shoots? Nope.

But you're right. That's not what I meant. I was using the current shift as an example of how things move akin to the shift from FD to EF. Some people like me that are used to the mirror are unhappy and will cling on as long as we can. Will I gripe about it in 40 years? Probably not. I'm sure there are some salty people out there that are invested in the EF system that will still moan about it long after the new system proves itself worthy.

Well I don't exactly gripe about it myself, but I will discuss the relative merits of totally mechanical vs partly electronic vs mostly electronic film cameras now (and I got into photography in the late 70s when i was in high school, though I actually dabbled with a little kit I got from Edmund Scientific when I was... 11 years old or so? That would have been 1974 if so)..anyway, I'll talk about the subject for another 40 years if I live that long. Don't mistake sitting around talking about stuff, even why we don't like certain things, with "griping." For a lot of us it's just something we do. I talk about stuff I'm interested in, and stuff I have opinions about.

 

[Cholentpot]

Well I don't exactly gripe about it myself, but I will discuss the relative merits of totally mechanical vs partly electronic vs mostly electronic film cameras now (and I got into photography in the late 70s when i was in high school, though I actually dabbled with a little kit I got from Edmund Scientific when I was... 11 years old or so? That would have been 1974 if so)..anyway, I'll talk about the subject for another 40 years if I live that long. Don't mistake sitting around talking about stuff, even why we don't like certain things, with "griping." For a lot of us it's just something we do. I talk about stuff I'm interested in, and stuff I have opinions about.

Sure, I understand.

But some people come across with a chip on their shoulder and an axe to grind. It's not a discussion to them, it's a fact with no historical outlook. To them it's still 1981 and Nikon shafted them and ruined everything. Not much retrospect.

 

[flavio81]

When burglars broke into the local camera store just before the pandemic, they didn't take just the latest digital SLR'S. Seems they homed in on the classic used Nikon case even more; took everything. Somebody knew what they were doing.

They probably read Photrio too.

 

[flavio81]

the F3 can be powered by the AA batteries in the motor drive - which have no problem powering the camera even in freezing weather. The button cells are not needed at all.

This is a very good feature of the F3 that I overlooked. The Canon guys made the silly mistake of not including this feature on the F-1N, which supposedly is as easy as simply adding just another electronic pin on the bottom of the body.

 

[flavio81]

But some people come across with a chip on their shoulder and an axe to grind. It's not a discussion to them, it's a fact with no historical outlook. To them it's still 1981 and Nikon shafted them and ruined everything. Not much retrospect.

Comparing the F3 to contemporary (1980-81) cameras is having no historical outlook, and having an axe to grind?!

 

[Sirius Glass]

I'm a Winston man.

Churchill?

 

[Les Sarile]

They probably read Photrio too.

I have a solid alibi . . .

This is a very good feature of the F3 that I overlooked. The Canon guys made the silly mistake of not including this feature on the F-1N, which supposedly is as easy as simply adding just another electronic pin on the bottom of the body.

The LX also has the Battery Cord to remotely locate the batteries on your person to keep them being affected by the cold.

Battery cord LX1 by Les DMess, on Flickr

Comparing the F3 to contemporary (1980-81) cameras is having no historical outlook, and having an axe to grind?!

I'm all about that historical context - cameras themselves and magazine reviews/disassemblies at the time. I marvel at these wonderful industrial works of art but look at them as tools while others apparently have developed a more personal connection from the results of their use. Very different perspectives indeed!

Selection 43 by Les DMess, on Flickr

 

[flavio81]

The LX also has the Battery Cord to remotely locate the batteries on your person to keep them being affected by the cold.
Selection 43 by Les DMess, on Flickr

I recall Pentax also offers the same for the P6x7 system.

I wonder which body part to store the battery in so it stays hot? Discuss...

My point was that Nikon did well in integrating the F3 motor power to the camera power. While Canon on the F-1N has a silly accessory that couples the motor power to the camera power by simulating a 4LR44 battery. So you have a little cable going from the motor to the camera. A kludge, really; Nikon's solution is more elegant. As is the F3 motor drive as well.

The older Canon F-1 had huge telephone-like cables to send power from a big power pack to the motor drive and then another one to send the power to the Servo EE finder... Again, why didn't they consider internal electrical buses through the camera? No electronics needed, just "dumb" electrical contacts. Later they reduced the cable to only one, from the motor straight to the EE finder:

But simply placing some electric pins on the bottom plate, that emerged as contacts at the finder mount would have avoided the need for any cabling.

 

[flavio81]

I'm all about that historical context - cameras themselves and magazine reviews/disassemblies at the time. I marvel at these wonderful industrial works of art but look at them as tools while others apparently have developed a more personal connection from the results of their use. Very different perspectives indeed!

+10000000

Agree.

 

[Paul Howell]

As a former AF combat photographer who then worked the wires, I used the Nikon I had at the time. I shot in tropical Africa, North Africa, one assignment in the Amazon, the North Sea Rigs, the Artic, if I had the F I shot with the F, the F2 the F2, and the F3P. Choice of camera came down to a SLR or rangefinder, Canon 7S or Leica IIIG, if I wanted to go quite. In my time Nikon was the industry standard for PJism, as I recall over 80% of PJs used Nikon, that changed with the AF Canon EOS 1. I did see Leica Rs, Minolta, Pentax, and one guy who shot for a newspaper chain in Germany had Swiss Alpas. It came down to that the wires, UPI, AP, Reuters, Black Star, the big papers, used Nikon. If I needed a lens I did not own or if my body was in the shop I could memo one out. Freelancers tended to have and use more than one body. Repair, at the time Nikon had the best world wide service centers. Lens selection, at one time Nikon had 66 lens on the market.

The F3 was an excellent pro level camera, was it better than the LX, Canon F1new, Minolta XK, maybe maybe not. I almost jumped to the LX, but the cost of new lens added just too cost for me to make the move. In terms of how a camera would have held up 30 to 40 years later. Not even a consideration in 16 years I had gone though 3 Nikons, by 1987 or 88 would have moved to either a F4 or Canon EOS1, the chances that any camera used on a daily bases would hold for 40 years, maybe a Leica M body.

In today's world finding a electronic camera that has held up is challenging. Of my first generation AF bodies, odd but the Pentax SF1n has held up the best.

If you can find a F3 in good condition it will make a good shooter, just don't be surprised or pissed off it just gives up. The F2, if you are willing pay for servicing it will likely out last a F3, maybe with a dead meter, but it will shoot.

 

[Cholentpot]

As a former AF combat photographer who then worked the wires, I used the Nikon I had at the time. I shot in tropical Africa, North Africa, one assignment in the Amazon, the North Sea Rigs, the Artic, if I had the F I shot with the F, the F2 the F2, and the F3P. Choice of camera came down to a SLR or rangefinder, Canon 7S or Leica IIIG, if I wanted to go quite. In my time Nikon was the industry standard for PJism, as I recall over 80% of PJs used Nikon, that changed with the AF Canon EOS 1. I did see Leica Rs, Minolta, Pentax, and one guy who shot for a newspaper chain in Germany had Swiss Alpas. It came down to that the wires, UPI, AP, Reuters, Black Star, the big papers, used Nikon. If I needed a lens I did not own or if my body was in the shop I could memo one out. Freelancers tended to have and use more than one body. Repair, at the time Nikon had the best world wide service centers. Lens selection, at one time Nikon had 66 lens on the market.

The F3 was an excellent pro level camera, was it better than the LX, Canon F1new, Minolta XK, maybe maybe not. I almost jumped to the LX, but the cost of new lens added just too cost for me to make the move. In terms of how a camera would have held up 30 to 40 years later. Not even a consideration in 16 years I had gone though 3 Nikons, by 1987 or 88 would have moved to either a F4 or Canon EOS1, the chances that any camera used on a daily bases would hold for 40 years, maybe a Leica M body.

In today's world finding a electronic camera that has held up is challenging. Of my first generation AF bodies, odd but the Pentax SF1n has held up the best.

If you can find a F3 in good condition it will make a good shooter, just don't be surprised or pissed off it just gives up. The F2, if you are willing pay for servicing it will likely out last a F3, maybe with a dead meter, but it will shoot.

F2 would outlast the F? I think I need to go and find an F2.

Anyone got one for sale?