Nikon F5 Lenses

[derelict]

Good luck!
As others have said, try the 80-200 on the F5 before selling it. Mine is very useable for most sports on a D700, 750, and F100. Sluggish on the F4, and sometimes hunts.
My experience with it was shooting university sports multiple times per week for about two years, always from the sidelines. That was about a year and a half back. During that time I also used comparable Canon gear, a newer 70-200 as a rental, and some longer teles. The 80-200 was a workhorse and bagged some of the best shots. Obviously MTB is demanding, but aside from the elevation changes it is more or less linear (subject moves towards and then away from camera) whereas something like figure skating or basketball is a little more erratic. One would expect a good AF system to track linear action fairly well.
Please let us know how it goes! I'm curious to see how it turns out.

I am definitely going to try my D lenses on the F5. Based on what I have read, it hammers to focus so they will probably work very well.

I will check back in once I start using it. The race season is over but I will probably take it out and shoot moving cars and things on the highway, just to get used to it.

 

[alentine]

I like the design of F4 much, it looks the mother of F3 not the reverse.
True physical dials, knobs and buttons on a camera is stylish, and make you feel more confident.
Design wise, F4 is the best to me.
But when I read what has been written about Nikon F5 performance, I wonder if there is in the history any better camera !?
Wondering if there’s any camera maker exists, except Nikon after making F5!?
I never read any confident statement at any time for any camera like this.

 

[Paul Howell]

Canon EOS 1v with sports battery grip, or Minolta 9. Both were released after the F5 in the Canon in 2000 the Minolta late 1999. the F5 has faster PFS, than the Minolta 9, but the Minolta 9 has top shutter speed of 1/12,000 with flash syn of 1/300 and has a built in pop up flash that works as a slave with Minolta flashes. The EOS 1v with sports grip had a higher FPS than the F5, and no better lens than the L series. What the F5 has is a better matrix metering, which I seldom use. The Minolta 9's body stainless steel, and there was a limited production run of white titanium. What I do like about the F5 is that battery grip is built in, takes AA batteries. My Minolta 9 can use AA with the battery grip or without the grip lithium batteries.

 

[derelict]

Canon EOS 1v with sports battery grip, or Minolta 9. Both were released after the F5 in the Canon in 2000 the Minolta late 1999. the F5 has faster PFS, than the Minolta 9, but the Minolta 9 has top shutter speed of 1/12,000 with flash syn of 1/300 and has a built in pop up flash that works as a slave with Minolta flashes. The EOS 1v with sports grip had a higher FPS than the F5, and no better lens than the L series. What the F5 has is a better matrix metering, which I seldom use. The Minolta 9's body stainless steel, and there was a limited production run of white titanium. What I do like about the F5 is that battery grip is built in, takes AA batteries. My Minolta 9 can use AA with the battery grip or without the grip lithium batteries.

Before getting my F4, I was pretty exclusively Pentax. Film and digital. I wanted an AF camera with various speeds and Pentax really never offered that so I ditched my Pentax stuff and went to Nikon. I thought about Minolta for a good long while. I sided against it due to availability and cross compatibility with digital mounts. Nikon just had more diverse offerings for the F mount than Minolta/ Sony A mount stuff.

 

[Paul Howell]

The last pro level camera Pentax made was the LX, their last top of the line body the MZ was the only film AF camera they made with metal body, but top shutter speed was 1/6000 of a second, the film drive was winder speed at 2.5 FPS. In terms of lens, both Canon and Nikon offer what is likely the best overall selection with Nikon edging out Canon as F4 and 5 can mount and meter to some extent all F mount lens expect new model AF E. Minolta lens are relatively inexpensive, the G line up was as good as Nikon or Canon, just not the range. I really like my Minolta 9, and the 800SI, but after a few years I think I should have spent the money to get a EOS 1V with sports grip. The 9 came out before SSM lens, unless the 9 was modified by the factory it will not work with newest lens including Sony A mount. The Minolta 7 came out later and will work with all Minolta/Sony A mount lens. I dont shoot a lot of sports, still when you need speed you need speed. The closest to a true sports body I have the Minolta 9000, with fresh batteries, (12AAs) it will shoot 6 to 7 PFS, otherwise 5.5 with bulk back and 100 feet of film possible to shoot for several hours. Down side is first generation AF body, AF is slow, and with the motor drive really heavy.

 

[abruzzi]

The last pro level camera Pentax made was the LX, their last top of the line body the MZ was the only film AF camera they made with metal body, but top shutter speed was 1/6000 of a second, the film drive was winder speed at 2.5 FPS.

Pentax also made the PZ-1p, which is a bit older than the MZ-S but it has a 1/8000 top shutter speed and you can control the aperture from the body (unlike the MZ-S) which opens up full use of modern Pentax lenses without aperture rings. I don't know what the body is made of, but it feels solid enough. I still prefer the MZ-S because it fits my hand better, and the UI is nice and simple.

 

[Paul Howell]

I have a PZ 1 P as well , it plastic, the AF is ok, FPS is faster than the MZ about 4, it along with a K2000 digital body is my travel kit. A nice camera, not really an action shooter, then again in the right hands can shoot action. I've only held a MZ-S once or twice, it does have a nice feel to it. I think the closes Minolta body to the MZ-s was the 9si, while the MZ is metal and weather sealed, the 9xi is slick plastic, weather sealed, shoots around 5PFS, has really good AF for the day, but used those darned creative cards, and is almost all menu driven. What is nice about the F4 is all dials, layout is very much a old fasioned SLR. all

 

[abruzzi]

What I like about the PZ-1p and the MZ-S is the so called “hyper program” mode, which automates aperture and shutter (P mode) until you adjust one, then it goes into aperture (A) or shutter (S) priority mode, when you adjust the other it goes into manual mode. (M)

on the MZ-S it just works seamlessly.

 

[Nodda Duma]

Curious why not considering the F6? I found it is like the F5, but....more so, if that makes sense.

 

[Paul Howell]

Other than cost, the F6, has a faster AF, improved metering, and with battery grip will shoot 7FPS, on paper the F6 is a very capable camera for action sports. One downside for a macro or astro shooter, does not have interchangeable viewfinder. On the upside, still in production and supported by Nikon, but will not work with new AF E lens.

 

[benveniste]

I think that G lenses are perfectly safe to use and will work with both metering and focusing. What about the later 'E', or whatever letter spaghetti Nikon uses, lenses? Anyone have any first hand knowledge?

The autofocus "E" lenses can only be used wide open. The AF-P lenses can't be used at all.

 

[derelict]

So, I have found an F5 and it is on the way to me. It is mint and I am extraordinarily excited to get it in my hands.

I did make it to a race a couple months ago and finally developed the rolls from it. In the conditions, the F4 handled itself decently well. There were more than a few frames where it just could not crank fast enough to adjust. I also have found that some films handle the action better than others. For example, XP2 is great for normal shooting but terrible for mixed light and quick movements.

Here are some samples across different film stocks (Provia 100F, Ultrafine Extreme 400, Ektar, Portra). I have found that Ektar and Provia are pretty phenomenal. Ultrafine works very well for its pricing and that Portra is just okay.
EmptyName 342 by Jarrod Hills, on Flickr

EmptyName 331 by Jarrod Hills, on Flickr

EmptyName 329 by Jarrod Hills, on Flickr

EmptyName 313 by Jarrod Hills, on Flickr

EmptyName 295 by Jarrod Hills, on Flickr

EmptyName 282 by Jarrod Hills, on Flickr

 

[derelict]

Also, the F6 is not a consideration for me as it is about 4x more expensive than an excellent condition F5 and I do not really mind the weight.

 

[alentine]

... I do not really mind the weight.

Are you sure?
Anyway, the statement in post#27 was just an iteration in the annual cameras issue of 1999, from the original 10 pages detailed test published on May 1997(Pages 70-79). Era of real photographers!
Nikon IMO, is the eastern version of Leica. When they want to reach perfection they do.
Some snapshots from Popular Photography May 1997 issue:

Could not upload one photo!
As for speed! Please watch this movie(not video) as it originally was done on film by Nikon F5(as claimed):

Though it’s very cheap for its value as a professional machine nowadays, it’s not obsolete like many many DSLRs cameras like Canon 1Ds MK I and many other DSLRs.
have a fun.

 

[derelict]

I weighed the F5 with lithium batteries vs. my F4 with lithium batteries.
Numbers:
F4 (standard, no grip): 2 lbs 9 1/8 ozs
F5: 2 lbs 15 1/8 ozs

One is definitely heavier but people who say that it is a monster and ridiculously weighty, are over exaggerating. I have already shot two rolls through mine since receiving it last Friday. The weight is actually nice. I shot with the 18-35D, 51/ 1.4D, and 85/ 1.8D and could steady the shot very easily. Slightly more so than the F4.