Nikon F4 or F6

[Huss]

Personally I'd get a f90x / n90x for $30 -50 and see how that works for you before deciding to drop the cash on f6.

“I want a Porsche 911!”

“You should really get a Golf GTI first and see how you like it”

 

[Henning Serger]

Hello Huss,

My perfect condition F6 is so bulletproof the AF failed.

it is very sad that the AF modul in your F6 has failed. Looks like you had bad luck, same as those few F5 and F4 users who had such failures.
I am also a memeber in the Nikon F6 user group onfacebook, with about 1.660 members there. And we have not seen there more failures compared to the F5 and F4.

Both my F4s are still great. They also seem to AF just as fast as my F6, and in dim light too!

From my tests and experience I have to disagree here, as the F6 AF is both faster and better in low light, too. The AF of the F4 is surprisingly good for its time, no question. But it cannot compete with the F5 and F6.

Of note - the latest E electronic aperture lenses do NOT work with the F6.

Not quite correct, as they do with open aperture. And stopped down with the trick I have described several times here on photrio.

......., and only two of the Sigma art lenses work (35 and 50).

No, at least four of the Art lenses: The 24-105 and the amazing 2/24-35 have also the classic mechanical aperture coupling.

More bad stuff about the F6? the CR123 batteries which are expensive and don't last long.

Don't worry, just use the MB-40 vertical grip with standard AA cells. I am using both my two F6 with MB-40 and Eneloop rechargeable batteries. Works perfectly, with 35 - 55 (!) films per charge (dependent on the using conditions). With the MB-40 you also have excellent ergonomics.

The F6 has an internal battery which it uses for the clock and menu memory settings. That eventually will die and it is a factory repair.

The intermal battery is a non-issue: When it dies the functionality of the F6 remains the same, you don't loose anything. The only difference is: When you want a correct date in the internal data storage / EXIF data, you have to set the time/date new again after you have changed the batteries. That is done very fast in a few seconds. After that when using the camera all is exactly as with a fresh internal battery.
I have had a dead internal battery for some months with one of my F6s. But surprisingly a "self-healing" happened. Without that I have done anything the internal battery is working properly again.

Menus are truly horrible back from when things first started with that.

I have again to disagree. I have no problems at all using the Menu functions on the F6. They are implemented in a very logic way, and are very easy to change.

F4 has no internal battery, no menus, just wonderful glorious dials.

With all these stupid and completely superfluous security knobs which have to be pushed first. It is nerve-wrecking and makes the ergonomics worse.
The F6 has also dials, which are much easier to handle. And the menu is only used for additional and rare / seldem used functions (functions the F4 and F5 don't have). You don't need the menu at all for all the normal standard functions.

The F4 is an excellent camera. Especially if you don't need excellent AF performance up to current modern standards.
The F4 was ahaed in its time. But time and technology have moved on. The main advantage today is its extremely low price and excellent price-performance ratio. In my opinion it is absolutely underrated compared to the current prices on the used market for an F2, F3, FM2, FE2, FM3A.

Best regards,
Henning

 

[Craig75]

“I want a Porsche 911!”

“You should really get a Golf GTI first and see how you like it”

Yr in trouble now because you've awoken Henning.

Please. Your f6 is just a n90x with a go faster stripe and a useless spoiler glued on the back.

The n90x is pure 1970s hairy chested muscle car barrelling through the tundra at 4 fps while Yr f6 is sat in an art and artisans half case at a coffee shop before you slip in back into its fogg bag almost ashamed.

 

[Henning Serger]

I used Nikon Fs, F2s and Nikkormats, and got to occasionally play with F3s and F4s. The one camera of all those I always wanted to own was the F4. Never used or wanted an F5, which is a brute, in terms of ability, strength and weight/size; or F6, which was never intended as a pro camera anyway, just a wealthy amateur toy, according to Nikon.

Concerning the last sentence: That is definitely wrong. Nikon has never said that. Just the opposite: Nikon has clearly said that their aim / target with the F6 was to develop their best professional film camera ever. And to offer their customers a really significant improvement to the former F5.
Nikon listened very attentively and in detail to the critic and improvement proposals the professional photographers had with the F5. And Nikon indeed implemented all these improvements (more than two dozen) in the F6.
I am working both with the F5 and F6. And I am very thankful for all the improvements the F6 has. It is really a joy to use the F6.

Best regards,
Henning

 

[Arthurwg]

Get the F6. and use it.

 

[Henning Serger]

Yr in trouble now because you've awoken Henning.

.
No, he is definitely not. I am a peaceful guy and I respect Huss really very much.

Please. Your f6 is just a n90x with a go faster stripe and a useless spoiler glued on the back.
The n90x is pure 1970s hairy chested muscle car barrelling through the tundra at 4 fps while Yr f6 is sat in an art and artisans half case at a coffee shop before you slip in back into its fogg bag almost ashamed.

Both my two F90X and two F6 absolutely disagree with that characterization....... They all live together in peace and harmony, and no envy .

Best regards,
Henning

 

[Craig75]

.
No, he is definitely not. I am a peaceful guy and I respect Huss really very much.



Both my two F90X and two F6 absolutely disagree with that characterization....... They all live together in peace and harmony, and no envy .

Best regards,
Henning

Haha I know. I like Huss photography a lot and I always look out for your posts as they are very educational.

We all know the OP is going to end up with f2 f3 f4 f6 f100 and "something just to throw in a bag" anyway but it's important to pretend none of this is inevitable.

 

[pkr1979]

We all know the OP is going to end up with f2 f3 f4 f6 f100 and "something just to throw in a bag" anyway but it's important to pretend none of this is inevitable.

Im really keen to avoid that ;-)

 

[MWL]

Concerning the last sentence: That is definitely wrong. Nikon has never said that. Just the opposite: Nikon has clearly said that their aim / target with the F6 was to develop their best professional film camera ever. And to offer their customers a really significant improvement to the former F5.
Nikon listened very attentively and in detail to the critic and improvement proposals the professional photographers had with the F5. And Nikon indeed implemented all these improvements (more than two dozen) in the F6.
I am working both with the F5 and F6. And I am very thankful for all the improvements the F6 has. It is really a joy to use the F6.

Best regards,
Henning

I've read the actual interviews with the designers of the F6. That is exactly what they said. The F6 came out after pros had already begun the switch to digital, and Canon were ahead of Nikon in terms of usage by pros. There is no way Nikon were going to win the pro market back with a film camera, regardless of how good it might be. That's also why it wasn't made as a "system" camera, like all the other Fs, no interchangeable heads, or any of the other accessories that characterized the F line. They could have named it something else, but why bother, it was pretty much the last film camera they were going to make anyway. I get that you love your F6s, but lets be realistic.

 

[Huss]

Yr in trouble now because you've awoken Henning.

Please. Your f6 is just a n90x with a go faster stripe and a useless spoiler glued on the back.

The n90x is pure 1970s hairy chested muscle car barrelling through the tundra at 4 fps while Yr f6 is sat in an art and artisans half case at a coffee shop before you slip in back into its fogg bag almost ashamed.

lol.

But at least I got the turbo spoiler!

To the OP. You always wanted an F4. So did I. Scratch that itch! Forget about the specs for a sec - they are just so fun to use. Plus if you don't like it you'll get your money back selling it. The joy of buying used!

 

[Sirius Glass]

To the OP. You always wanted an F4. I always wanted a Bronica S and I ended up with a Hasselblad 503 CX, a Hasselblad 903 SWC and a bunch of Hasselblad lenses. I wonder what is in store for you.

 

[pkr1979]

Right, right... the F4 it is then. Getting the F6 will not make me forget about the F4. Lenses then..? Id like a midrange zoom to go with it. I suspect the 35-70mm 2.8 afd is a bit big. But what about the 35-105mm 3.5-4.5 afd? Or the 35-70mm 3.3-4.5 af?

 

[Paul Howell]

Well, I would get a Canon 1N or V, skip all the issues matching Nikon lens with Nikon bodies. Although Canon is no longer developing EF mount lens, lens are still in production, L glass is as good as it gets.

 

[drmoss_ca]

And this is why no one should ever come here for advice about which camera to buy.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Well, I would get a Canon 1N or V, skip all the issues matching Nikon lens with Nikon bodies. Although Canon is no longer developing EF mount lens, lens are still in production, L glass is as good as it gets.

And this is why no one should ever come here for advice about which camera to buy.

Yes, people push their drug of choice rather than supply experience and advice.

 

[ColdEye]

28/1.4 D and the 85/1.4 . If you want a decent tele, there is always the 300/4 (there is a regular D version and there is the AF-s D version too, I have had both and stuck with the af-s D).

 

[Sirius Glass]

I like the 20mm to 35m Nikon AF zoom and the 28mm to 200mm Nikon zoom [also the 28mm to 300mm Tamron AF zoom]. In the manual lens category I like the f/3.5 28mm PC-Nikkor lens for traveling especially when I am photographing buildings.

 

[Craig75]

Right, right... the F4 it is then. Getting the F6 will not make me forget about the F4. Lenses then..? Id like a midrange zoom to go with it. I suspect the 35-70mm 2.8 afd is a bit big. But what about the 35-105mm 3.5-4.5 afd? Or the 35-70mm 3.3-4.5 af?

there's always the danger that you end up on that dramatic norwegian coastline with some majestic sea bird just too far away for that 70mm or 105mm to reach.

we are already looking at a mid tele for some touchline volleyball photography and possibly a longer tele for that comorant...

 

[Craig75]

And this is why no one should ever come here for advice about which camera to buy.

The OP knew exactly what he was doing. He wanted to be thrown headfirst into the nikon rabbithole by the hivemind and then plead innocence afterwards

 

[MWL]

Right, right... the F4 it is then. Getting the F6 will not make me forget about the F4. Lenses then..? Id like a midrange zoom to go with it. I suspect the 35-70mm 2.8 afd is a bit big. But what about the 35-105mm 3.5-4.5 afd? Or the 35-70mm 3.3-4.5 af?

Now that you've made the correct choice for a camera LOL, you need some appropriate lenses. When I went down that road, I decided to use only the lenses that were available during a certain time period that I set for myself, late '80s to the first couple of months of '93.

That meant no AF-D lenses for a couple of them, as they weren't available then. I went with a 24mm 2.8 AF, 50mm 1.4 AF, and 70-210 4-5.6 AF-D. I also got a 50mm 1.8 AF and 28-70 3.5-4.5 AF-D for some comparisons with my Canon lenses from the same period.

I used this page to make my choices regarding types and serial numbers:

http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/lenses.html

 

[Huss]

Right, right... the F4 it is then. Getting the F6 will not make me forget about the F4. Lenses then..? Id like a midrange zoom to go with it. I suspect the 35-70mm 2.8 afd is a bit big. But what about the 35-105mm 3.5-4.5 afd? Or the 35-70mm 3.3-4.5 af?

I use the 28-105D lens as my zoom, and a 50 1.4D as a compact, fast, low light option. Because, film.
I used to use the 28-70 3.5/4.5 which also is great on film, but sold it because I also had the 28-105..
(I also use the 24 2.8D, 35 2.0D but would pick the zoom and the 50 if I could only have 2 lenses. Only 1 lens? Then the 50 1.4 cuz again film and you need the speed).

Nikon F4 w/ 28-70D and TriX:




Nikon F4 w/ 35 2.0D and Lomo Babylon 13:



Nikon F4 w/ 28-105D and TriX:




Nikon F4 w/ 50 1.4D and Fuji Superia 400:




Nikon F4 w/ 50 1.4D and TriX:

 

[Sirius Glass]

there's always the danger that you end up on that dramatic norwegian coastline with some majestic sea bird just too far away for that 70mm or 105mm to reach.

we are already looking at a mid tele for some touchline volleyball photography and possibly a longer tele for that comorant...

Hence my use of the 28mm to 200mm Nikon AF zoom or hte 28mm to 300mm Tamron AF zoom.

 

[Timmyjoe]

Having owned and used both cameras, I will say the one outstanding feature of the F6 is its metering. It just nails exposure. Now the F4s was no slouch in this area, but the F6 is just better at nailing exposure every time. The F6 probably focuses a bit faster than the F4s. And the F6 can use all my AF-S Nikkor glass. Not sure they all work on the F4s (no longer own the F4s).

But I liked holding and shooting with the F4s better than the F6. I had the larger of the two battery grips on my F4s, and use the MB-40 on the F6. Again the F4s just fit my hands and was more comfortable for me to shoot. YMMV.

Best,
-Tim

 

[benveniste]

Right, right... the F4 it is then. Getting the F6 will not make me forget about the F4. Lenses then..? Id like a midrange zoom to go with it. I suspect the 35-70mm 2.8 afd is a bit big. But what about the 35-105mm 3.5-4.5 afd? Or the 35-70mm 3.3-4.5 af?

I agree. Getting an F6 will not make you forget about the F4. Getting an F4 might, though. I don't think I know anyone who is neutral on the F4; they either love it, hate it, or have never thought about it. I'm on the negative side -- I feel that the changeover from the F4/N90 to the F5/F100 is what saved Nikon from decaying into a niche player like Pentax.

With the F4, you have some delightful "features" such as only being able to use some lenses in "A" and "M" mode, and other lenses only in "P" and "S" modes. You don't get to use VR, but you do get to use pre-AI lenses -- few F5 or F6 owners bothered having Nikon modify their cameras to accept them. Autofocus speed was slower than Canon and Minolta when the camera was introduced, and hasn't gotten any less frustrating in the interim. There's some truth in the claim that it's Nikon's best manual focus camera.

As for lenses, if you are looking to save weight and bulk, the F4 is likely the wrong place to start. It's even a bit heavier than the generally more capable F5. While I find a 35-70mm f/2.8 or 28-70mm f/2.8 a bit unbalanced on an F100, I would expect either to balance well on either of the beefier pro bodies. In my opinion the 35-70mm f/2.8 and 28-105mm are the best of the "screwdriver" normal Zoom-Nikkors, but I also have a soft spot for the versatility of the "streetsweeper" 24-120mm f/3.5~5.6D.

 

[Henning Serger]

I've read the actual interviews with the designers of the F6. That is exactly what they said.

No, that was not what they said.
They said they wanted to design a real upgrade to the F5, and therefore the best film SLR they have ever built. That is the reason why the F6 is improved so much and in so many regards in comparison to the F5. Nikon wanted to make an even better camera, and they succeeded. I know for sure, because in contrast to you I am using both cameras, also for professional jobs.

People with no market knowledge have misinterpreted one statement in one interview with the F6 engineers: That Nikon expected a change in customer market share, because the market of especially press photographers had begun to switch to digital during the R&D phase.
But that is a different topic, and is not related to the fact that Nikon's R&D target / aim was to design their best film SLR ever, and a significantly improved camera compared to the F5.
Because what people who are doing this misinterpretation don't know is that all so-called "professional" cameras from all manufacturers, 35mm and medium format cameras, were mainly bought by non-professionals:
60-80% (depending on camera type and regional market) of all these professional cameras were bought by non-professionals, so by (enthusiast) amateurs.
That is the reason why these cameras could be designed and introduced to the market: The amateurs financed the R&D. The pure professional market has never been big enough for that. I am working in this industry, including market research. I have the numbers in my analysing tools.
No matter whether nikon F2, F5, Canon F1 or EOS 1V, Hasselblad 500 series, Rolleiflex TLR series or Mamiya RB / RZ 67: The biggest customer / buyer group has always been the amateurs, not the professionals. Example: I visited the orginal Franke&Heidecke / Rollei factory two times,and talked there also to the distribution and marketing experts. They told me that constantly over all the decades about 80% of their cameras were bought by non-professionals. Hasselblad confirmed that for their sales, too. Leica as well. With Nikon and Canon there has been a bit more regional differentiation, but the overall picture has been and is the same.

I know that after the introduction of the F6 lots of professional portrait and wedding, nature and travel photographers bought the F6. And Nikon of course have known that demand. That the F6 was only bought by "rich amateurs" is simply wrong. One of the numerous internet myths.

The F6 came out after pros had already begun the switch to digital, and Canon were ahead of Nikon in terms of usage by pros. There is no way Nikon were going to win the pro market back with a film camera, regardless of how good it might be.

That was not their intention. Their intention was to offer the best possible film SLR to those who wanted or needed one. No matter whether for professional or amateur use. And at that time still lots of professionals were using film (when Nikon started the design phase film sales were on a global record level).
So Nikon had exactly the same intention with the F6 as they had earlier with the F, F2, F3, F4 and F5: At all time points they intended the best design they can do for all potential customers with their top F-line model.
Same did Canon with their top-line cameras.

That's also why it wasn't made as a "system" camera, like all the other Fs, no interchangeable heads,

No "system" camera? Sorry, you definitely don't know the F6. It is offering lots of system functions none of the other F cameras can offer.
And this "the F6 is not a professional camera because it has no interchangeable viewfinders" is just internet talk of amateurs, camera collectors and gear-heads.
But not at all talk of professionals, because they have abandoned interchangeable viewfinders decades ago. The demand for interchangeable viewfinders had been tiny and negligible, and because of that the manufacturers stopped them decades ago: Minolta was first in the 80ies, a bit later Canon followed in 1989 with their EOS 1, Pentax then a bit later and Nikon were the last in 1999 with the D1. And the others like Leica and Contax choosed the more robust fixed prism viewfinders right from the start.
Fact is that professionals are using cameras with fixed prism viewfinders successfully for several decades. Tell them that they are using "amateur" or "non-system" cameras because the viewfinder is not interchangeable.....if you have luck they will only laughing .

Best regards,
Henning