What is the story behind this design?

[MFstooges]

I am not sure if any other manufacturers attempted this. I know Nikon has at least four cameras with the shutter button on the pivot of the film advance lever. I don't know how the mechanism works but I am thinking it must be more complex than a separate shutter button but yet it is on Nikon F3, one of the most reliable camera from Nikon. In fact I really like Nikon F3's design because of the shutter button.

 

[Don_ih]

They got it from Zeiss. Look at a Contax III.

 

[grain elevator]

I suspect this was mostly done to get a cleaner looking top plate, with perhaps the marginal benefit of slightly better grip on the shutter speed dial with one less protruding bit. I don't think it's terribly complicated on these electronically shuttered cameras. It may be a bit more complicated on mechanical shutters like the Minolta SRT.

 

[__Brian]

They got it from Zeiss. Look at a Contax III.

View attachment 386005

That is the 1950s Contax IIIa- but the Contax II and Contax III ot the 1930s and 1940s uses the same configuration.


Canon also used it in the Canonet series.



The one on the Right- ignore that other camera...

 

[__Brian]

And if you ever take a Contax apart- watch out for the Spring Loaded Parts as you take the Set Screws out...

RIMG0749 by fiftyonepointsix, on Flickr
Contax IIa and IIIa are the same for this part.

 

[MFstooges]

Interesting! It does give cleaner look and free up space they even have to put big letters on Nikon EM just to fill up the space.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I am not sure if any other manufacturers attempted this. I know Nikon has at least four cameras with the shutter button on the pivot of the film advance lever. I don't know how the mechanism works but I am thinking it must be more complex than a separate shutter button but yet it is on Nikon F3, one of the most reliable camera from Nikon. In fact I really like Nikon F3's design because of the shutter button.


View attachment 386003

The Nikon F100 has the same shutter in the film advance lever. I find it intuitive and easy to use. If one were to need to dissect it, and choose to, what would percentage of the camera's entire life time would that take? Not much above zero. If confronted with the needed repair, I would just take it to Samy's Camera or send it off to KEH.com and use my saved time on something more time and cost efficient.

 

[4season]

Perhaps Giorgetto Giugiaro could answer that. But one thing's for sure: The grip area for the right hand was an immediate hit, and this, plus the signature vertical red accent stripe, continue on almost all Nikon camera bodies to the present day.

 

[Sirius Glass]

And if you ever take a Contax apart- watch out for the Spring Loaded Parts as you take the Set Screws out...

RIMG0749 by fiftyonepointsix, on Flickr
Contax IIa and IIIa are the same for this part.

Textbook example of why I choose to leave camera repairs to the experts.

 

[Don_ih]

Nikon stole all kinds of stuff from Zeiss. Their entire rangefinder design is prime example.

That is the 1950s Contax IIIa

Yeah - that's a photo I got from ebay quickly. I went off my own Contax III (not IIIa). They're almost identical, anyway.

 

[Dustin McAmera]

Also several Zenits: at least the Zenit 3M, Kristall, and E.

 

[MFstooges]

And if you ever take a Contax apart- watch out for the Spring Loaded Parts as you take the Set Screws out...

RIMG0749 by fiftyonepointsix, on Flickr
Contax IIa and IIIa are the same for this part.

and what is that tiny gear that seems to rotate in different axis orientation?

 

[MFstooges]

Nikon stole all kinds of stuff from Zeiss. Their entire rangefinder design is prime example.



Yeah - that's a photo I got from ebay quickly. I went off my own Contax III (not IIIa). They're almost identical, anyway.

back then Japan is the copycat of the world

 

[MFstooges]

The Nikon F100 has the same shutter in the film advance lever. I find it intuitive and easy to use. If one were to need to dissect it, and choose to, what would percentage of the camera's entire life time would that take? Not much above zero. If confronted with the needed repair, I would just take it to Samy's Camera or send it off to KEH.com and use my saved time on something more time and cost efficient.

F100?

 

[Chan Tran]

The EM and F3 were among the first Nikon cameras designed by Giorgetto Giugiaro so perhaps it was his idea.

 

[__Brian]

and what is that tiny gear that seems to rotate in different axis orientation?

That is part of the frame count mechanism- it drives the dial, easier to see how it works here-

RIMG0748 by fiftyonepointsix, on Flickr

The IIa is much different from the II, and the IIIa even more so from the Contax III. The older cameras are much easier to take apart. The IIIa- pure torture to remove parts just to clean the viewfinder.

 

[Sirius Glass]

F100?

typo

 

[Les Sarile]

This was a common design feature used by Minolta starting with their first - the SR-2, released in 1958 all the way through their SRT lineup.

Minolta SR-2 by Les DMess, on Flickr

SR-1_SRT-101_SR-2 top by Les DMess, on Flickr

Except for the XK, it doesn't look like this was used in their other X models . . .

Minolta XE-7 R by Les DMess, on Flickr

 

[jimjm]

Then of course there's all the Leica M-mount film cameras, except the Leica CL and Minolta CLE.
Last time I checked, my Nikon F100 did not have a film wind lever.....

 

[Les Sarile]

I don't know if you've already visited the Nikon Camera Chronicle site but it is a great read about the history and development of their cameras.

 

[Pieter12]

The shutter release button centered on the film advance lever is not a hard idea to come up with for a 35mm camera. By convention, both are operated by the right hand, on top plate.

 

[reddesert]

Nikon stole all kinds of stuff from Zeiss. Their entire rangefinder design is prime example.

The shutter of a Nikon rangefinder w/horizontal travel shutter curtains is completely different from the shutter of the Contax rangefinder w/vertical travel shutter blinds. To my understanding the Nikon rf shutter is more like the older Leica rf shutters - I have looked inside a Nikon rf and it's definitely simpler than the Contax shutter. (I haven't taken apart a Leica rf, but reliable internet sources make this comparison.) The Nikon looks somewhat like a Contax on the outside - ironically given this thread, the Nikon rf does not have its shutter button inside the wind knob. But the Kiev is much more of a literal copy of the Contax AFAIK.

It was once a common argument that the Japanese camera and optics manufacturers had stolen / copied a lot of their material from European makers (as I understand it, many German patents were voided after the war, so it was copying not stealing). But in retrospect, many of the supposed copies quickly surpassed their models, so one wonders if "copy" is even the right word.

 

[Ben Hutcherson]

The shutter of a Nikon rangefinder w/horizontal travel shutter curtains is completely different from the shutter of the Contax rangefinder w/vertical travel shutter blinds. To my understanding the Nikon rf shutter is more like the older Leica rf shutters - I have looked inside a Nikon rf and it's definitely simpler than the Contax shutter. (I haven't taken apart a Leica rf, but reliable internet sources make this comparison.) The Nikon looks somewhat like a Contax on the outside - ironically given this thread, the Nikon rf does not have its shutter button inside the wind knob. But the Kiev is much more of a literal copy of the Contax AFAIK.

I’ve never owned a Nikon RF, but as I understand it the F is basically an SLR version of the SP. In fact if I’m not mistaken, some very early Fs(like the first couple hundred made, or maybe not that many) had cloth SP curtains. In turn, some late SPs had metal F curtains.

The F and I think also the SP follow the shutter button placement of Barnack Leicas with the button toward the rear of the top plate. The rotating shutter collar to set rewind is also Barnack.

Of course Leica by that time has moved to the shutter in the rewind pivot with the M3 and M2.

I think in this side discussion, it’s worth mentioning that there’s no one single innovative feature in the F. With that said, it was an innovative camera by combining a bunch of features from elsewhere(instant return mirror, automatic aperture, interchangeable finders, provisions for coupled metering, and a few others I’m forgetting) into a single camera and, probably more importantly, offering a full system from the beginning. By 1960, they’d covered 21mm to 300mm in rectilinear(plus an 8mm fisheye somewhere along the way), macro, and some other special purpose uses. That’s what made it such a game changing camera.

I’ll also mention that I will take a Canon Barnack clone over a real Leica Barnack any day. If the Leica IIIc was my only interaction with the brand, I’d not own another, and I’m hard pressed to think of a way a Canon IVs isn’t better. The M3 and subsequent M cameras are a different story, although the Canon 7 is a worthy match in a lot of ways. The 7 is the only RF I’ve been personally owned that combines a huge number of frame lines with the ability to only display one at a time…

 

[Les Sarile]

I’ve never owned a Nikon RF, but as I understand it the F is basically an SLR version of the SP. In fact if I’m not mistaken, some very early Fs(like the first couple hundred made, or maybe not that many) had cloth SP curtains. In turn, some late SPs had metal F curtains.

The F and I think also the SP follow the shutter button placement of Barnack Leicas with the button toward the rear of the top plate. The rotating shutter collar to set rewind is also Barnack.

Of course Leica by that time has moved to the shutter in the rewind pivot with the M3 and M2.

I think in this side discussion, it’s worth mentioning that there’s no one single innovative feature in the F. With that said, it was an innovative camera by combining a bunch of features from elsewhere(instant return mirror, automatic aperture, interchangeable finders, provisions for coupled metering, and a few others I’m forgetting) into a single camera and, probably more importantly, offering a full system from the beginning. By 1960, they’d covered 21mm to 300mm in rectilinear(plus an 8mm fisheye somewhere along the way), macro, and some other special purpose uses. That’s what made it such a game changing camera.

I’ll also mention that I will take a Canon Barnack clone over a real Leica Barnack any day. If the Leica IIIc was my only interaction with the brand, I’d not own another, and I’m hard pressed to think of a way a Canon IVs isn’t better. The M3 and subsequent M cameras are a different story, although the Canon 7 is a worthy match in a lot of ways. The 7 is the only RF I’ve been personally owned that combines a huge number of frame lines with the ability to only display one at a time…

Stephen Gandy lists a few firsts for the F on his site -> The Nikon F's Place in History
I think the first three are not limited to just the Japanese market alone.

 

[Don_ih]

The shutter of a Nikon rangefinder w/horizontal travel shutter curtains is completely different from the shutter of the Contax rangefinder w/vertical travel shutter blinds. To my understanding the Nikon rf shutter is more like the older Leica rf shutters - I have looked inside a Nikon rf and it's definitely simpler than the Contax shutter. (I haven't taken apart a Leica rf, but reliable internet sources make this comparison.) The Nikon looks somewhat like a Contax on the outside - ironically given this thread, the Nikon rf does not have its shutter button inside the wind knob. But the Kiev is much more of a literal copy of the Contax AFAIK.

It was once a common argument that the Japanese camera and optics manufacturers had stolen / copied a lot of their material from European makers (as I understand it, many German patents were voided after the war, so it was copying not stealing). But in retrospect, many of the supposed copies quickly surpassed their models, so one wonders if "copy" is even the right word.

I was speaking casually.