Turns out they got it right in 1959 (Nikon F)

Rol_Lei Nut · Dec 18, 2011

fstop said:
Obviously you never used it or used the mlu on the F2, F3 or Minolta.With F you waste one frame for every shot you want to use mlu.If you want to do a multiple exposure using mlu its impossible.
Trying to push in the DOF button and twist the lever one handed is clumsy.

I seriously wonder if *you* have used an F:
No multiple exposure with MLU?
Push the DOF button?!!!??

Really now....

kivis · Dec 18, 2011

Les Sarile · Dec 18, 2011

Rol_Lei Nut · Dec 18, 2011

If the pretty F pictures are to show that they have a DOF button, then I should have spelled my previous statement out more clearly: you don't need to press the DOF button to use MLU...

Mark Crabtree · Dec 18, 2011

Rol_Lei Nut said:
If the pretty F pictures are to show that they have a DOF button, then I should have spelled my previous statement out more clearly: you don't need to press the DOF button to use MLU...

I thought they were just pretty pictures to show off F's. The DOF only really shows in one anyway.

You're right of course about the DOF, but I can't imagine it will change any minds. I love the F, just like I love the M2; some people do not, and like to pick at the flaws. I'd rather just take pictures.

I may have to break down and take a couple pictures of my F's, too

kivis · Dec 18, 2011

j-dogg said:
my Nikkormat has been my go to manual walkaround for years. Damn thing is a beast, I want to step into an F

I started with a Nikkormat in1974, last year I got an F with no meter prism. Oh my gosh!

---
I am here: http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=26.278172,-80.249832

markbarendt · Dec 18, 2011

Quit it guys you are giving me GAS.

fstop · Dec 19, 2011

Rol_Lei Nut said:
I seriously wonder if *you* have used an F:
No multiple exposure with MLU?
Push the DOF button?!!!??

Really now....

If you knew as much about Nikons as you claim you would realize I was talking about the F2 and F3. You've obviously never have tried to use the mlu while making multiple exposures with the F.

lxdude · Dec 19, 2011

fstop said:
If you knew as much about Nikons as you claim you would realize I was talking about the F2 and F3.

Well if you were, your statement was clear as mud.

E. von Hoegh · Dec 19, 2011

fstop said:
If you knew as much about Nikons as you claim you would realize I was talking about the F2 and F3. You've obviously never have tried to use the mlu while making multiple exposures with the F.

Maybe he hasn't, but I have. On a copy stand, as I said, it works fine for multiple exposures.

You appear to not only be a self appointed expert on every-damn-thing, but also have the affliction of the need to be right all the time. Sad.

lxdude · Dec 19, 2011

Well, fstop, let's take a look at your statement:

fstop said:
Obviously you never used it or used the mlu on the F2, F3 or Minolta.With F you waste one frame for every shot you want to use mlu.If you want to do a multiple exposure using mlu its impossible.
Trying to push in the DOF button and twist the lever one handed is clumsy.

As the subject was the Nikon F, your first sentence reads as comparing the F's MLU to the MLU's of the F2, F3 and Minolta. Your last sentence reads in context as referring to the F's MLU, which you had referred to as clumsy. You did not say it referred to the other Nikons.

And why did you include "the Minolta"? Which one? The SR-T 101 I used to use had MLU, and it did not require pressing the DoF button. I never tried to do multiple exposures with the F, but I can't see any reason why they would be impossible with the mirror locked up.

Myself, I never found the MLU procedure on the F2 or F3 to be clumsy. A little manual dexterity is all it takes. Very quick and easy.

Your second sentence is wrong. One frame is lost; the mirror stays up and subsequent shots (like say, bracketing) are made until you move the MLU lever back to its original position. If what you meant was for every shot which is a whole new composition, OK- except with the 21mm and its separate viewfinder.

E. von Hoegh · Dec 19, 2011

The mirror lockup on the Nikkormat FtN is perfect for my uses.Also, when using the selftimer, the mirror goes up as soon as you press the release, giving the camera 10 or 12 seconds to calm down. Much more convenient than the F, I don't need to carry a cable release.

fstop · Dec 19, 2011

lxdude said:
Well, fstop, let's take a look at your statement:

As the subject was the Nikon F, your first sentence reads as comparing the F's MLU to the MLU's of the F2, F3 and Minolta. Your last sentence reads in context as referring to the F's MLU, which you had referred to as clumsy. You did not say it referred to the other Nikons.

And why did you include "the Minolta"? Which one? The SR-T 101 I used to use had MLU, and it did not require pressing the DoF button. I never tried to do multiple exposures with the F, but I can't see any reason why they would be impossible with the mirror locked up.

Myself, I never found the MLU procedure on the F2 or F3 to be clumsy. A little manual dexterity is all it takes. Very quick and easy.

Your second sentence is wrong. One frame is lost; the mirror stays up and subsequent shots (like say, bracketing) are made until you move the MLU lever back to its original position. If what you meant was for every shot which is a whole new composition, OK- except with the 21mm and its separate viewfinder.

I'm talking about composing between shots, I do a lot of multiple exposure work combining daylight scenes with night time scenes using different lenses.You also have to rewind the frame which really makes a mess of positioning.

as for being clumsy thats my opinion of its operation

darkosaric · Dec 21, 2011

philosomatographer said:
I guess I really like the F, because there is no dead meter bits in the viewfinder, just pure concentration on the image

I remembered this again when I saw this photo in some review today

cheers,

Jerevan · Dec 21, 2011

Looks like a display for a computer game or a HUD from a fighter plane.

philosomatographer · Dec 21, 2011

darkosaric said:
I remembered this again when I saw this photo in some review today

Ugh, I could never use a camera that litters the viewfinder display with such ugly, useless eye candy. Data overlays can be cool, but not this kind of data overlay... It's amazing how much we lost, when we lost physical, single-purpose controls (in consumer cameras). This has caused manufacturers to feel the need to litter viewfinders with all these icons.

snegron · Dec 21, 2011

Very nice images! I find the Nikon F is special in so many ways. I have been using Nikon equipment for the past 25+ years, however, I have owned cameras of different brands in that time. Among the many Nikon film bodies I have owned, the F ranks among the top 2 (the other is the F3HP). Some time ago I bubble-wrapped all my film gear (Nikon S2 rangefinder, F2A, FM2, F100, N80, etc.) but kept two bodies available; my F with FTN Photomic finder and my F3HP with MD4 motor drive. Imo, the F feels right in my hands. I find it fun to use, I always look forward to shooting rolls with it. I can't explain why I like shooting with my F, I just simply do! As for the lenses, I only use three Nikkors; 24mm 2.8 AIS, 50mm 1.4 AIS and 105mm 2.5 AIS.

Pumalite · Dec 21, 2011

Good choice

philosomatographer · Mar 17, 2012

When shooting negative film in the Nikon F, one really does not need a light meter - I thus enjoy the elegance of the plain prism, and took a couple of images in a quaint restaurant with very complex late-afternoon lighting. The dynamic range of Portra 400VC just "takes it all in". The character of the 1950s Nikkor lens designs are so very different to the OM Zuikos I am used to, but it's one than can certainly be enjoyed for what it is. Not as "smooth" nor as "sharp" as most Zuikos, but the image have a certain biting acutance to them. As ever, I love the focus accuracy of this remarkable viewfinder (and I am very used to the famous Olympus OM-1/2/3/4 viewfinders).

(Nikkor-H.C 1:2 f=50mm @ f/2.0, Nikon F)

(Nikkor-H.C 1:2 f=50mm @ f/2.0, Nikon F - very complex colour correction on this one, she was sitting in blue light, with warm sunlit background)

Alan Klein · Mar 17, 2012

When I was stationed in the USAF in Japan between 1965-67, I bought a Nikon F Photomic T with 50mm, F/1.4 lens for $189.00 ($500 in the states) and added a 135mm Nikor although I forget what I paid. I knew nothing about SLR's at the time having only shot with a twin lens box cheapo as a tennager. Nikon was well known in 1965 as the 35mm camera so that's what I bought. Unfortunately, the kit was lost on a NYC subway a few years later. So I bought a Nikkormat with 50mm, f/2 with some non-Nikon zooms. The cost stateside was too prohibitive for me as a non-pro to buy the top-of-the-line.

I still have the Nikormat but shooting medium format now when shooting film. I tried the 50mm on an E-PL1 m43 EVIL to see what it can do with digital sensors and if it's not blasphemy, here is the link http://www.flickr.com/photos/alanklein2000/5345148224/

I've always had a soft spot in my heart for Nikon even buying their Nikonos IVa underwater camera which is built like a tank and shoots very sharply with its' 35mm lens.

John Austin · Mar 18, 2012

When crunch time comes and I need reliable 35mm I resort to my fleet of Nikon Fs, they are the superbest, and for wide angle work the very old 2.1cm Nikkor is delightful

However, my fondest memory of a 35mm camera is my old 6c, from when I used a fleet of Alpas

View attachment 47985

But apart from the intelligent lever wind, which meant if you kept you eye to the viewfinder while winding film you didn't end up with your right eye hanging off your thumbnail, the Nikon is far better - But fond memories are fond memories

John

cmo · Mar 26, 2012

Just a small arrangement:

Pumalite · Mar 26, 2012

MacReady said:
They don't need to last fifty years, they will be redundant in < ten

You overlook the "attachment" factor. The Nikon F will NEVER be redundant.

Richard S. (rich815) · Mar 26, 2012

philosomatographer said:
Ugh, I could never use a camera that litters the viewfinder display with such ugly, useless eye candy. Data overlays can be cool, but not this kind of data overlay... It's amazing how much we lost, when we lost physical, single-purpose controls (in consumer cameras). This has caused manufacturers to feel the need to litter viewfinders with all these icons.

That is ridiculous but in all fairness you typically can push a button and have it set for all or most of the extraneous crap not show up on the viewfinder or back screen.

Ralph Javins · Mar 27, 2012

cmo said:
Just a small arrangement:

Good morning, CMO;

An interesting "arrangement." The Nikon F and the Photomic FTN are still here and working, and Plus-X is still available, but FX-135 Panatomic-X has been long gone, and Microdol-X is no longer available also. Some nice memories.

I had started to use X-TOL as a replacement for Microdol-X, and now it is gone also. At least there are some workable substitutes from one of the APUG commercial sponsors, FreeStyle, and I am looking into other black and white films from European makers. I was an exclusively EKCo film and chemical user for 50 years, and now that is changing. At least my older Minolta and Nikon cameras are still here.

Turns out they got it right in 1959 (Nikon F)

Rol_Lei Nut

kivis

Les Sarile

Rol_Lei Nut

Mark Crabtree

kivis

markbarendt

fstop

lxdude

E. von Hoegh

lxdude

E. von Hoegh

fstop

darkosaric

Attachments

Jerevan

philosomatographer

snegron

Pumalite

philosomatographer

Alan Klein

John Austin

Attachments

cmo

Pumalite

Richard S. (rich815)

Ralph Javins

Turns out they got it right in 1959 (Nikon F)

Attachments

Attachments

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency