Where have all the Nikons gone?

[E. von Hoegh]

Hey hey "selling first born" - can you just tell at what pricing (around) your mind condition f2 was and at what year?
with regards

PS : By the way "real mint" to me is a relative term. Some say:" this F2 I can offer you is real mint but you have to know it is a camera of an age > 40 years.
That is the condition Theo showed.
You have little scratches onto camera surface and mostly black color is a little damaged.But that is meanwhile a very rare and expansive condition.
"Real mint is the same as new - not a single little scratch a.s.o. like this :
View attachment 197245
(No worry it is not mine - so burglars pls. don't come over)

Why does that camera have a chrome baseplate??
Also, how can the term "mint condition" apply to anything other than a coin?


I purchased an F2a body here from the classifieds. When it arrived, it turned out to be a late '71 body with a dp11 finder; the body is beautiful with only the lightest few marks on the baseplate, otherwise spotless and was clean as a whistle with new foam, the shutter is dead accurate; the dp11 has had considerably more experience but also immaculately clean and accurate. Cost $100 shipped. This one's worth getting the eyelevel prism for.
Last September I was given another F2a, very late production, black with very slight brassing but had sat without a lens and the mirror box was full of dust, also the top right corner was dented and the mlu didn't raise the mirror all the way. But the meter is good, the shutter will be fine after an overhaul (it's useable now, but the highest speeds are off). Also it came with a Beattie Intenscreen which is absolutely useless.
So that's where two of them are, one gem and one that might have sold for $25 but will be just as good as the gem when I finish with it.

 

[E. von Hoegh]

With the much bigger WL finder in these MF cameras, you can actually focus while shooting overhead. You cannot properly focus the tiny 35mm WL finders this way.

Yes indeed, I've used Rolleis this way, with a bit of practice it's pretty easy and could be done from a trench or foxhole.

 

[mshchem]

In wartime it is bad to build up a tripod under enemy fire and shot 4x5.
Therefore Rollei 6x6 and Hasselblad gave advantage and 120 format was good enough. But to focus (at the frontline is a real risk).So some used Leica cameras.
Nikon offered a Leica "like" 35mm and began with Nikon F. From war photographers other professional noticed statements of remarcable reliabitity of Nikon 35mm. So first professionals ordered Nikon F (mostly to shot press photography) others hold on LeicaM.
Most shot 5x7 with professional work.
Later amateuric photographers saw Nikon cameras in proffesional hands.
The beginning of Nikons reputation at the time (before this) german camera industry delivered the whole world with their products (cameras and lenses) and don't care about Japan cameras. A big failure by the way.
And under extreme condition Nikon F don't have a need to focus it. Some hold their motorized "F" over their head and covered while shoting pictures. No way with Hasselblad and Rollei 6x6 from my point.
with regards

Ah Yes! You are correct! There were plenty of Nikons and Leicas in Vietnam. One Nikon F stopped a bullet!
Best Mike

 

[Theo Sulphate]

I am not sure what you mean or if you're just not aware of other pro cameras s during that time ...

Were the Topcons considered pro-caliber? The B? I have an R II, which is nice but the shutter speed dial settings are very crowded and have to be selected very carefully:

Why does that camera have a chrome baseplate??
...

Plastic protector.

 

[E. von Hoegh]

Were the Topcons considered pro-caliber? The B? I have an R II, which is nice but the shutter speed dial settings are very crowded and have to be selected very carefully:


View attachment 197400



Plastic protector.

Argh.

 

[chip j]

The US Navy used Topcons during the Veitnam war.

 

[tomkatf]

Ah Yes! You are correct! There were plenty of Nikons and Leicas in Vietnam. One Nikon F stopped a bullet!
Best Mike

This one didn't...

 

[mshchem]

This one didn't...

View attachment 197409

Man! What's the story? Crazy politicians getting us into wars.

 

[tomkatf]

..."Nikon offered a Leica "like" 35mm and began with Nikon F. From war photographers other professional noticed statements of remarcable reliabitity of Nikon 35mm. So first professionals ordered Nikon F (mostly to shot press photography) others hold on LeicaM."...

Ironically the Korean War helped Nikon become recognized as a major camera and lens manufacturer. Photojournalists (DDD, Mydans et al) covering the war using Leicas discovered the better quality of some Nikkor lenses
and quickly started mounting them on their Leicas. I'd imagine this also led to the appreciation, use and accessibility of the contemporary S3 and SP Nikon bodies. And later the F's.

 

[tomkatf]

Man! What's the story? Crazy politicians getting us into wars.

Japanese Photojournalist Ichinose Taizo's (November 1, 1947 – November 29, 1973) Nikon F. I'm not sure if this camera was on him when he was killed.

 

[kivis]

Who needs an F2?

 

[mshchem]

Japanese Photojournalist Ichinose Taizo's (November 1, 1947 – November 29, 1973) Nikon F. I'm not sure if this camera was on him when he was killed.

There's a lot about this fellow on the internet. Two movies, big deal. He was killed by the Khmer Rouge. It took guts to get mixed up in that. A heroic figure.

 

[trendland]

Man! What's the story? Crazy politicians getting us into wars.

It's not the camera in responcibility of war. It's not the photographer. The photographer is documentary it - in case of vietnam it heller to end this war.
Perhaps you remember world press photo of 1968. The scene on the bridge was also documented from a television team end changed the policy - cause from puplic pressure against it.
with regards
PS : From my point a constuction wich is such stable as first Nikons - that should be the topic here - is also stable enough to reach under normal condition a men's livetime.

 

[trendland]

Ironically the Korean War helped Nikon become recognized as a major camera and lens manufacturer. Photojournalists (DDD, Mydans et al) covering the war using Leicas discovered the better quality of some Nikkor lenses
and quickly started mounting them on their Leicas. I'd imagine this also led to the appreciation, use and accessibility of the contemporary S3 and SP Nikon bodies. And later the F's.

You are quite right.That is also from my memory. They changed from Leica to Nikon.
with regards

 

[trendland]

Why does that camera have a chrome baseplate??
Also, how can the term "mint condition" apply to anything other than a coin?


I purchased an F2a body here from the classifieds. When it arrived, it turned out to be a late '71 body with a dp11 finder; the body is beautiful with only the lightest few marks on the baseplate, otherwise spotless and was clean as a whistle with new foam, the shutter is dead accurate; the dp11 has had considerably more experience but also immaculately clean and accurate. Cost $100 shipped. This one's worth getting the eyelevel prism for.
Last September I was given another F2a, very late production, black with very slight brassing but had sat without a lens and the mirror box was full of dust, also the top right corner was dented and the mlu didn't raise the mirror all the way. But the meter is good, the shutter will be fine after an overhaul (it's useable now, but the highest speeds are off). Also it came with a Beattie Intenscreen which is absolutely useless.
So that's where two of them are, one gem and one that might have sold for $25 but will be just as good as the gem when I finish with it.

Yeah - that's great and is just showing One has much luck others have bad luck.
I remember a dealer who has one nice F3 at about USD 200,- and a F2 at $125,- but last was strong used. So I thought to that time : If I am just waiting one or two years such cameras become more cheap due to digital (2004). Perhaps USD 90,- / $ 50,- from example. what a big failure.Pricing increased from that point.
By the way : This year was the cheapest with cameras (not in digital [ ~2000,- bucks/8 - 12 MP APSC] )
And it was the cheapest with film ever.
Agfa E6 $2,79 Ferraniachrome 100
$ 2,39 in 35mm.

with regards......an other lucky one

 

[trendland]

Agreed, but I was asking about you saying the majority of pros didn't like the F3...

Yes that's right - at the beginning. I remember late 87 I talked about with some pros - they all blamed the new F3.
From reliability, from automatic exposure,
a.s.o. I was in contact to Pentax because of 20% press dicount with PENTAX LX.
But my real favourite was Nikon F3.So I did no fast decision.
(a year later they A L L owned the F3 )
with regards

PS : Perhaps this issue was in concern that Nikon offered last series of F2 a short time parallel with the brand new F3.
Most statements from pros firstly were:
"The real thing is a F2 the F3 has no value." ....and it had to do with electronic most did not like - but without batteries both cameras do their job - I did not notice such revolt with F4 some years later.
But as I don't need autofokus till today
I was the guy stating later : "The real thing is a F3 , the F4 has no value....a.s.o.....
with greetings

 

[trendland]

I am not sure what you mean or if you're just not aware of other pro cameras s during that time but this may help.

Yes what you are stating is correct. There have been others. Thanks you mentioned the Canon F1. I wanted to state before but I didn't (a bit off topic - but M E A N W H I L E - who cares about and the OP seams to be glad [hope].....)
I ever met just one pro with Canon F1. Canon had more luck with pros. later.
F1 was build a long time but sales wasn't as high as Canon wanted to see.
Today Canon is dominating the proffessional sector in same way as with amateuric photographers. But the great days of Canon in this niche began with later autofocus cameras.
Pentax had no real luck with LX (I own one) it was priced highly due to minimal sales. And Minolta XK is a real exotic stuff isn't it (nice that you have one of it).
I am not quite sure - but if I remember correct a fashon photographer worked with Minolta 35mm (beside 6x7 Pentax).
But it may be he has got this type (XK).
To me this Minolta has the tuch of a never build prototype. So it has to be extreme rare. I now one of much later Minoltas with 1/12000 sec. Is your camera the basis of that later model?
with regards

 

[trendland]

Why does that camera have a chrome baseplate??
Also, how can the term "mint condition" apply to anything other than a coin?


I purchased an F2a body here from the classifieds. When it arrived, it turned out to be a late '71 body with a dp11 finder; the body is beautiful with only the lightest few marks on the baseplate, otherwise spotless and was clean as a whistle with new foam, the shutter is dead accurate; the dp11 has had considerably more experience but also immaculately clean and accurate. Cost $100 shipped. This one's worth getting the eyelevel prism for.
Last September I was given another F2a, very late production, black with very slight brassing but had sat without a lens and the mirror box was full of dust, also the top right corner was dented and the mlu didn't raise the mirror all the way. But the meter is good, the shutter will be fine after an overhaul (it's useable now, but the highest speeds are off). Also it came with a Beattie Intenscreen which is absolutely useless.
So that's where two of them are, one gem and one that might have sold for $25 but will be just as good as the gem when I finish with it.

Well - Beattie interscreens have the tendency to 1/3 - 1/2 stop wrong exposure - is that right ?
It is just from plastic out of the original box wich looks like "chrome".
with regards

 

[trendland]

Ak47 kaliber 7,62 is much to strong on short distance........

with regards

PS : Holding "overhead" cost some fingers in bad cases.

 

[trendland]

This one didn't...

View attachment 197409

Ak47 is much to strong....

with regards

 

[Les Sarile]

And Minolta XK is a real exotic stuff isn't it (nice that you have one of it).

Clearly, Minolta was a few years ahead with XK. Minolta ad that was not so subtle . . .

 

[E. von Hoegh]

Well - Beattie interscreens have the tendency to 1/3 - 1/2 stop wrong exposure - is that right ?
It is just from plastic out of the original box wich looks like "chrome".
with regards

Closer to one stop, but the problem is that it is useless for focussing.

 

[ciniframe]

I'm not a Nikon user but if one needed a body to hang lenses on perhaps one of the lesser non-professional models. Folks I've met who had the FG really liked it and consumer cameras weren't as likely to have seen heavy use. They were compact and lightweight too. It would be the body I think I'd look for if I found a killer deal on a nice Nikkor or some special aftermarket lens with an F mount and needed a body to hang it on.

 

[Theo Sulphate]

The best value-for-money Nikon body is the Nikkormat FT2, I think.

* takes modern batteries (FT, FTN do not)
* meters both pre-AI and AI lenses wide open (FT3 does not)
* meter is very accurate
* has DOF preview & mirror lock-up
* very rugged & reliable
* inexpensive & plentiful

 

[Les Sarile]

Who needs an F2?

It is 2018, so who really does need an F2 . . .