Anyone used a Nikon S3 2000 in Studio?

[dave lackey]

This may seem strange but after finishing post-processing my last digital studio shoot, and hankerin' for a S3 2000, I was just wondering what would prevent me from using the rangefinder camera in studio....

😱

Seems at least one member is shooting with his Bessa...

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=49964

 

[sbug]

Nothing should stop you at all. Go for it.

 

[dave lackey]

Oh, BTW, if it will work with my strobes (or even my micro-sync), what lens would be best? I have found that the longer the lens the more comfortable are my clients!

 

[VinceC]

It has a fine PC flash sync, like an old Nikon F.

S3 works nicely with 105/2.5

 

[dave lackey]

Thanks, Vince,

That is cool...gotta justify the purchase somehow! Now to visit KEH for a lens.

 

[rbsinto]

Dave,
There is nothing of course to prevent you from using an S3 in a studio, but the question I keep asking is "Why would you want to?" I can't see any advantage to using this rangefinder over a 35mm SLR, DSLR, or larger format camera in-studio. Your rangefinder lens selection is limited compared to the other aforementioned formats, and if you are fortunate enough to have a long high-speed telephoto such as the 180, there are the parallax issues to deal with while focusing.
Other than doing it to simply satisfy idle curiosity, I really don't see the point or any advantage to it.

 

[VinceC]

I really don't see the point or any advantage to it

For one, you'd know if the strobes went off and if the subject blinked.

I'm not quite clear why a DSLR or film SLR would be so superior. The beauty of studio setups is that you're completely controlling the lighting. So auto-anything and DSLR review screens become less important. Your preview lights are showing you the final setup results.

Contax in the 1930s had a coupled 180/2.8, but the longest Nikon RF coupled lens is 135/3.5 ... lenses longer than that use a reflex housing.

I know some studio photographers burn through rolls of film with motor drives. But others use a more deliberate approach of establishing a mood, then waiting for the right moments.

Nikon RFs are joy to use with strobes. x-sync is 60 or below, you can see the scene at the moment of flash, and the lifesize viewfinder can be very intimate.

Biggest drawback is the frailty to sync cords.

 

[rbsinto]

Vince,
For me, the greatest advantage is lens selection, I've got about 14 SLR lenses, (primes and zooms) from 12mm at the short end up to a 300 2.8 (and teleconverters to take me up to 600 if I really needed it ), as well as a 105 micro-Nikkor, and I'd never have that kind of selection with a Nikon rangefinder, regardless of how much money I had to spend.
As for knowing if the strobe fired, yes, you are correct, with the rangefinder you'll see it but with the SLR you won't. So if I'm not sure, I'd ask the subject. Besides, only a fool would spend all that time and money setting up a shoot and then only take one shot of a particular pose or set-up. And as for the 1/60th or slower flash synch? Although my FA synchs at 1/250th, my F2 at 1/80th, and my F at 1/60th, there is no reason why they can't be used at a slower flash synch.
Everybody does what they do. That's Sadoff's Law. You do what you do and I do what I do. If shooting in a studio with a rangefinder makes you happy, that's great. Me? I'm just not convinced that there is any advantage to it, and your argument did nothing to change my opinion.

 

[splitimageview]

I don't know if there is an inherent 'advantage' to using a rangefinder in a studio, as it depends on the subject matter and many other factors, including the preference of the photographer.

It would be a rare subject indeed to require a 300 or 600mm lens in a studio though. 🙂 Or even a 12mm.

For me, an S3 with a 105 would be a great setup for portraits, in the studio or out...from personal experience one of the nice things about RFs and portraits is their non-threatening nature...they tend to be small, discrete, and quiet...all things that can help the subject feel comfortable.

 

[amateriat]

I'm with Vince on this: once upon a time, I'd have agreed that studio shooting with an RF was daft. But then I made the big "mistake" of trying it just once, and found myself preferring it for the same reasons I do outside the studio. (Note: I don't do much studio stuff.)

Just as it is outside the studio, the RF isn't a do-all camera. For me, though, it's the "85% Solution." (For most of the rest, there's this little Casio digital job here...)


- Barrett

 

[BillBingham2]

I have to side with Vince on this one too. I started using RF with flash way back in High School, it was so much easier to focus in existing darkness and you can see the expressions of the people burned into your mind. When I moved to a Nikkormat FTn, I lost that.

I use RFs for several classes in flash photography I took and people thought I was nuts. I could see the lighting on the subject and it allowed me to decide if I got the shot or not.

Range of lenses I am hard pressed to use anything the S3 could handle (15mm to 135mm).

I kind of look at studio work as anything between a 35mm and a 4x5, there is no one best solution. When all you have is a hammer, the world looks like a nail.

Try it, I think you'll like it.

B2 (;->

 

[dave lackey]

Thanks for your feedback everybody!

My "new" S3 2000 should be here in a week or so, just in time for another studio session...so who knows? 😀

Now, if I can just find a manual somewhere to get familiar with the S3 before it gets here....😱

 

[rbsinto]

Dave,
Try
www.craigcamera.com
www.manualsrus.com
www.manuals2go.com
Among the three you should be able to get yourself a manual for the S3 (I expect that Craig Cameras will be your best bet. He has zillions of manuals for everything imaginable).
I hope this information is helpful.

 

[dave lackey]

Thanks, Rob!

Gonna be interesting to see the differences in RF and SLR gear...