but I gotta say I just prefer the advantages of 35mm
Having fast AF, a flash linked to the camera, and plus I already have Nikkor lenses.Aside from the ability to shoot Kodachrome, I really can't imagine what those "advantages" would be.
A 35mm SLR would be the very last style camera I'd consider spending more than a 100 $'s on. Especially a camera as big and heavy as an F series Nikon, as nice as they are.
Since going back to MF, my F3 which I purchased new, has seen very little use, even though I have a nice suite of Nikkor lenses to go along with it. The MF negs are so nice, and the character of the optics are so much better, that I hardly ever choose the 35 over my other choices.
That said, it's not the camera, or lenses, or film format that are going to make you a great photographer, or even a moderately good one. If you can't make great pictures with an N50 and a 50mm series E lens, you won't be able to take better pictures with an F6.
I would go with the F3, but my flash is made for AF Nikon cameras. I'm thinking I'll buy a Leica III and a N90s.
F4 hands down. Buy it. Love it. Use it. Don't worry too much about the fast AF thing. To most people it's not noticeable.My choices are another BGN F5 at $300 or a EX F4s at $350.
What do you think?
I want to shoot slides and I'm wondering if the shutter on the f4 may be a bit more accurate when compared to the F3 shutter.
The F100 is better, but not worth 4 times the price.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?