Nikon F3HP: Worth the hype?

[bring_back_pro400h]

My first roll:

Rules are rules.

Love the halations. I'll go shoot hella gas stations at night with 500T once I get my Nikon.

 

[bring_back_pro400h]

I like the first pic. The funniest comment I read about Cinestill 800 is that you have to take at least one pic of a gas station at night.

The shame there is just that at f1.4, the lens I have just goes all Promist 1/2 hog wild with long exposure due to the damaged coating. Some of the pics failed to nail focus when I should've stopped down. Oh well, it's a learning experience.

 

[Huss]

Love the halations. I'll go shoot hella gas stations at night with 500T once I get my Nikon.

Try and find vintage gas stations. Extra points for that.

 

[Cholentpot]

Try and find vintage gas stations. Extra points for that.

In the rain +1, in the snow +2, during a tornado +10

Gas station caught fire a little while ago near me. Got some photos +50.

 

[Les Sarile]

In my crappy, damaged coating Minolta lens that I thrifted, it produced some crazy highlights when overexposed + wide open. 500T is the same thing as Cinestill 800T, and that's all the rage for tungsten light night photography now. These photos are quite bad but exhibit the colors from the test roll of 500T that I shot.

I like night photography myself but haven't tried these films. This image looks great so I am not sure what's bad about it.

 

[bring_back_pro400h]

I like night photography myself but haven't tried these films. This image looks great so I am not sure what's bad about it.

You're your own worst critic, I guess. In hindsight I'd stop down slightly to retain more sharpness overall, and maybe would have framed it differently. It was a very fast shot and I didn't have time to think.

 

[Moose22]

I like night photography myself but haven't tried these films. This image looks great so I am not sure what's bad about it.

Not going to say it's my favorite film. In fact, the halation bugs me pretty quickly, but to each his own.

That said, give it a try. You can get some fun pics and it is distinctly different than shooting portra 800.

The last one was shot with an F3T, BTW. I really do use my F3s way more than I thought I would when I got the first one.

 

[Les Sarile]

Not going to say it's my favorite film. In fact, the halation bugs me pretty quickly, but to each his own.

That said, give it a try. You can get some fun pics and it is distinctly different than shooting portra 800.

The last one was shot with an F3T, BTW. I really do use my F3s way more than I thought I would when I got the first one.

Very nice work!
No doubt there are many factors that influence the results we see and no better way to really know other than to use it!

 

[Huss]

Cinestilll 800 with a Cosina CX2

 

[Huss]

As above but with a Rollei QZ35W

 

[bring_back_pro400h]

Not going to say it's my favorite film. In fact, the halation bugs me pretty quickly, but to each his own.

That said, give it a try. You can get some fun pics and it is distinctly different than shooting portra 800.

The last one was shot with an F3T, BTW. I really do use my F3s way more than I thought I would when I got the first one.

How do you like the F3? I've got mine coming in a few days.

 

[Huss]

The 80:20 metering pattern on the F3 is unique and excellent

 

[Moose22]

yeah, 80:20 is not spot, but very center weighted. I use it and the ae lock when I'm working fast to pick what's most important to me, then reframe for the shot and find it faster than centerweighted and futzing with dials and joysticks on a modern digicam or the F6. I actually shoot my Z7 that way a lot of the time on spot. When working more slowly I'll spot check lights and shadows and use manual, and the tighter pattern helps.

The 60:40 on other Nikons works, but it's not like an evaluative matrix and is kind of muddy. I've gotten used to the 80:20 meter enough to prefer it. Especially for B&W. They went back to 60:40 for the FM3A, which I don't understand, they should have either kept 80:20 or done a matrix like the FA.

 

[bring_back_pro400h]

yeah, 80:20 is not spot, but very center weighted. I use it and the ae lock when I'm working fast to pick what's most important to me, then reframe for the shot and find it faster than centerweighted and futzing with dials and joysticks on a modern digicam or the F6. I actually shoot my Z7 that way a lot of the time on spot. When working more slowly I'll spot check lights and shadows and use manual, and the tighter pattern helps.

The 60:40 on other Nikons works, but it's not like an evaluative matrix and is kind of muddy. I've gotten used to the 80:20 meter enough to prefer it. Especially for B&W. They went back to 60:40 for the FM3A, which I don't understand, they should have either kept 80:20 or done a matrix like the FA.

That's actually perfect, my other cameras are all either center-weighted or set to center-weighted. It allows me to have more precision in metering for highlights and shadows while also taking into account the surroundings of my subjects.

 

[Huss]

And that's the advantage of the F3 in real use over lesser 'professional' cameras.. The F3 offers not only the 80:20 pattern, but AE lock. There are a few 'pro' cameras that do not have AE lock.
I use AE lock about 50% of the time. Can I use manual metering? Yes, but this is much quicker, and is part of the advantage of an AE camera.

 

[Moose22]

Exactly, Huss. When I work fast I use the AE lock. One of the things I like most on the F3, and on the FM3A, which has the lock at a very comfortable location for me. But the heavy centerweight of the F3 works best for the lock method.

I go manual in situations where I've determined the exposure and it isn't going to change. Stage lights are a good example, I set exposure for the face of the performer and never touch it because the colored lights and wacky backgrounds can fool even really modern meters. I deal with that just like using an external meter on a Leica or my C330 -- set it and forget it. But even then the weight helps me see what's going to blow out or go black.

For walkin' around shooting in and out of shadows, or at night or sunset, I point - lock - compose - shoot. It goes super fast, even with the digital. F3 seems made for this. I imagine it's the press focus of the camera, your typical newshound in 1980 wanted the face of the guy at the podium properly exposed, or the dude catching the ball, or whatever the subject was. It's not a landscape camera design, it's a press/wedding/etc design. After a dozen rolls I really understood where it was coming from.

 

[bring_back_pro400h]

And that's the advantage of the F3 in real use over lesser 'professional' cameras.. The F3 offers not only the 80:20 pattern, but AE lock. There are a few 'pro' cameras that do not have AE lock.
I use AE lock about 50% of the time. Can I use manual metering? Yes, but this is much quicker, and is part of the advantage of an AE camera.

Is the AE lock a half press of the shutter button? I know that a half press turns the meter on. This is often how I shoot with my Sony A7Rii, center-weighted meter, and either center zone or single-point focus. I find I get a lot more keepers with the right things in focus/exposed this way because I'm much more intentional with my shots, rather than letting the camera decide for me. Especially on digital, since the blown-out highlights retain much less information than film.

 

[Sirius Glass]

And that's the advantage of the F3 in real use over lesser 'professional' cameras.. The F3 offers not only the 80:20 pattern, but AE lock. There are a few 'pro' cameras that do not have AE lock.
I use AE lock about 50% of the time. Can I use manual metering? Yes, but this is much quicker, and is part of the advantage of an AE camera.

AE lock and all the variants are quite useful and I use them often. Hence my comments about metering without the sky et al.

 

[Moose22]

Is the AE lock a half press of the shutter button? I

No, its on the front of the camera. I tend to grab it with my left hand ring finger.

ABout half way down the page here it is illustrated:

Nikon F3HP Detail Operational Instruction Part I

 

[Huss]

That's one reason (of a few) that I got rid of my Pentax LX but kept my F3. The LX does not have AE lock. Some people excuse that saying as it has OTF metering it would be impossible to incorporate AE lock, but the Olympus OM4 also has OTF and has AE lock.

 

[Les Sarile]

That's one reason (of a few) that I got rid of my Pentax LX but kept my F3. The LX does not have AE lock. Some people excuse that saying as it has OTF metering it would be impossible to incorporate AE lock, but the Olympus OM4 also has OTF and has AE lock.

Also, if you want a full manual camera with the sophisticated metering of the OM-4 then look at the OM-3 . . .

OM-3 by Les DMess, on Flickr

Full disclosure I don't use AE lock on any of my cameras that have it as I would just as soon use manual mode. Most likely because all these cameras have a different way of doing this and I just didn't want to remember them all . . . or cannot remember them all . . .

I don't know why Pentax chose not to include AE lock on the LX but maybe they wanted to stay elegant. Like no viewfinder blind or multiexposure controls. Also I would suggest given the LX's extremely long aperture priority capability - I've tested hours long, that it wouldn't be possible. Personally, I would not want the LX to lock an exposure because it continually monitors the scene for changes in lighting and would adjust exposure time (longer or shorter) accordingly.

BTW, comparisons being made between Kodak's Portra film, 250D and cinestill - how are the latitudes on those others?

I used to be really picky about exposure - hence my preference for real spot metering, but after characterizing what I get from various films I use in my workflow, I am no longer that picky when using most color negatives or b&w. In fact, for daylight shooting, I don't even use a meter. For instance, this is a comparison of Kodak Portra 400 and some digis I had at the time and you can clearly see why I don't quibble much between metering modes - or even having one, when using this film and others like it.

Kodak Portra 400 overexposure by Les DMess, on Flickr

At +10 overexposure, I can still get something reasonable with the mildest of post work using white balance and levels. I could just as well adjust exposure during scan.
Also, at that time I have not yet characterized the full latitude of Kodak Ektar 100 and why I stopped at +5. I simply assumed it wouldn't be so wide given that it was supposed to be a much more contrasty then Portra. I know better now.

More or less I adjust shutter speed to achieve a result I am looking for as opposed to worrying about "correct" exposure. For instance I came upon this scene - daylight hours, and the waterfall was barely flowing. The camera's meter suggested 1/60 but the result would have been real bland. I figure I needed 2 seconds to get the effect I wanted and knowing Fuji 100's latitude from testing that it wouldn't be a problem.

Fuji 100-26-26B by Les DMess, on Flickr

My first roll:

Rules are rules.

If you've ever been to Vegas, there is this sign as you drive into the strip that many stop and take a shot of. During the daytime it's easy but at night this is problematic as most - if not all detail, gets blownout kinda like those signs above the pumps in your gas station shot. BTW, not a critique of your shot as you may not have cared about those details which still looks great. In this case I took the shot using Kodak Ektar 100 which came out not unreasonable. But I then took that single frame and scanned it over, normal and under and now all the detail on the sign can be seen. The film itself was able to capture the info but one straight scan cannot achieve all the info.

Kodak Ektar 100_20-01B by Les DMess, on Flickr

This is another that shows the latitude of Portra 400 in a single frame - dark shadows and blownout highlights.

Kodak Portra 400-04-24A by Les DMess, on Flickr

In this case, I used shadows/highlights post tools to bring out detail in the shadow and highlights. If it were important, I suppose I could have also done the under-normal-over scan method.

 

[Moose22]

BTW, comparisons being made between Kodak's Portra film, 250D and cinestill - how are the latitudes on those others?

Portra's latitude is ridiculous. Especially 160.

I haven't tested Cinestill much. I'd be interested to know if others have and how it compares. The scans I've posted are lab scans, and, frankly stated, the noritsu is a piece of shit. I get better with my camera, though I haven't tried bracketing like you.

What are you scanning with when you bracket like that?

 

[bring_back_pro400h]

Portra's latitude is ridiculous. Especially 160.

I haven't tested Cinestill much. I'd be interested to know if others have and how it compares. The scans I've posted are lab scans, and, frankly stated, the noritsu is a piece of shit. I get better with my camera, though I haven't tried bracketing like you.

What are you scanning with when you bracket like that?

My lab uses a Frontier, and I scan with my Sony A7Rii in a light box rig using a Nikon macro and some 3D printed holders.

Is the Noritsu really that bad?

 

[Moose22]

My lab uses a Frontier, and I scan with my Sony A7Rii in a light box rig using a Nikon macro and some 3D printed holders.

Is the Noritsu really that bad?

I hate it.

And the results are neither good nor consistent. My biggest issue is that I have constant problems with thing like the blue skies coming back with banding.. here's a super mild example:

But I've also had really major striping in skies on landscapes, way worse than this at times. I just have this one online as an example. So frustrating. We tried to figure it out, but never did, and anything with a sky is a roll of the dice.

And, frankly, it is someone else's vision processing it so I have no idea what they're thinking of when they choose contrast and color settings. I've brought enough back to try and get the striping fixed that I just gave up and spent a crapload of money to get my own scanning set up and I do anything at home that I might actually care about.

Noritsus were made for speed and to scan for scan-to-print machines. They're steam age technology by computer terms, the only reason they're good for labs is that they're mostly automated and fast.

Anyway, the point is that I have no idea about cinestill dynamic range based on a lab scan.

 

[bring_back_pro400h]

I hate it.

And the results are neither good nor consistent. My biggest issue is that I have constant problems with thing like the blue skies coming back with banding.. here's a super mild example:

But I've also had really major striping in skies on landscapes, way worse than this at times. I just have this one online as an example. So frustrating. We tried to figure it out, but never did, and anything with a sky is a roll of the dice.

And, frankly, it is someone else's vision processing it so I have no idea what they're thinking of when they choose contrast and color settings. I've brought enough back to try and get the striping fixed that I just gave up and spent a crapload of money to get my own scanning set up and I do anything at home that I might actually care about.

Noritsus were made for speed and to scan for scan-to-print machines. They're steam age technology by computer terms, the only reason they're good for labs is that they're mostly automated and fast.

Anyway, the point is that I have no idea about cinestill dynamic range based on a lab scan.

Yikes, that banding is pretty bad. Cinestill is relatively expensive and harder to find, I think that due to the halation and tendency for static discharge, it's more of an artsy film stock than something like Portra 160/400/800. On the other hand, true ECN-2 film with the right chemical process is used in professional settings and may produce better results. My lab has begun selling ECN-2 film (50D, 250D, 500T) and offering ECN-2 processing for the same price as C-41, so maybe I could try a latitude/DR test with one roll from each of the three film stocks. Nikkor glass with good metering could be a decent benchmark, and in my opinion, the Fuji Frontier scanners aren't terrible.