Nikon F2 or F3?

[Calzone]

Cal,
Obviously the electronically timed shutter of the F3 should be more accurate than the F2's however Sover adjusts the F2 for 1/3 stop accuracy at all speeds which is more accurate than they left the factory. He only ever had one of mine that could not be 1/3 accurate at 1/2000 because some idiot had over tightened the roller tension spring. Furthermore an F or F2 should never be left in the cocked position as this will adversely effect these very small springs and render the speeds inaccurate.

John,

The point I was trying to make is that sometimes mechanical cameras need adjustment.

About 6 years ago I had my Wetlar M6 overhauled by Sherry a factory trained repair person. To me there is a big difference between a CLA and an overhaul: meaning new parts and more disassmbly. Recently I had Nippon perform a vertical adjustment to my rangefinder and they recommended a complete overhaul because my speeds were off and were out of spec. Anyways I was not surprised since the old M6 over the years was shot both regularly and heavily like a pro camera. I ended up refaining from getting another overhaul and rebuild because the camera still shoots fine, although the speeds might be off. I'm thinking it is most likely its the fast speeds run a little short because the slow speeds sound spot on to me.

Thinking this is what happens to F2's, and that is the context of what I was trying to say.

Cal

 

[nobbylon]

Cal, I couldn't agree more and with most F2's approaching 40yrs old I'd say most need a little tinkering. I have yet to see an F3 that needed anything other than the things I have already mentioned. My preference is the F3 as I just believe it to be a nicer camera to use however there's nothing wrong with the F2. I'd like to combine the paddle and needle meter display with the F3 and it's meter cells to make a perfect user mf F,
regards john
PS I'm selling my F2's and F3 when I get back from my latest trip at the end of November. I'm sorry yet pleased to say that the F6 is better than all of them for ease of use, weather sealing, accuracy, speed and manual focus! I'm an F6 convert.

 

[Timmyjoe]

I've heard that before John. A buddy of mine has an F6 after years of an F3HP and F2's, and he is just nuts about that camera. He says the meter is incredible and the most accurate of any he's ever used, and being that he's seventy and been doing this his whole life, he's used a lot of cameras.

Glad you like your F6. If I wasn't shooting 100% digital for work, I'd probably look into getting one of those.

Best,
-Tim

 

[Huss]

The F6 is a very different camera than the F2. People get F2s now because cameras like the F6 are everything that they don't want. It's basically an AF DSLR that happens to shoot film!
I use Fs, F2s, M3s etc because they are the opposite of my digital cameras. They are mechanical, they don't need batteries, and they (yes even the F2!) are small in comparison to stuff like the F6. Autofocus? Don't want it. Autowind? Don't want it. AE? Don't want it. Battery dependancy? Don't want it.

 

[Huss]

I'm sorry yet pleased to say that the F6 is better than all of them for.... manual focus!

How so? Did you change the focusing screen on yours? It has the green dot thing like other AF Nikons, but does not have a proper MF screen IIRC.

 

[Timmyjoe]

The F6 is a very different camera than the F2. People get F2s now because cameras like the F6 are everything that they don't want. It's basically an AF DSLR that happens to shoot film!
I use Fs, F2s, M3s etc because they are the opposite of my digital cameras.

I couldn't do my job without my D4 and the AF-S G lenses that go with it. What I love about the old mechanical cameras (which I use for personal projects and long term documentary work) is that they allow me to slow down and work at a very different pace than the photojournalism work. I can spend much more time with the subjects I am working with, and take time with exposure and focus, all using a very simple tool. There are no editors breathing down my neck, no dashing off to process and caption digital files and upload them to an FTP only minutes after shooting them. The camera system I use for work is far more complex than my F3HP, F2, and assorted MF AIS lenses. It can do more at a much quicker pace, but there's a disconnect from the slow process of photography that I fell in love with some forty-odd years ago.

Best,
-Tim

 

[Huss]

I hear ya Tim! I think most of us use these relics (!) as a way of stepping back, slowing down and soaking it all in.

 

[rbsinto]

I hear ya Tim! I think most of us use these relics (!) as a way of stepping back, slowing down and soaking it all in.

I've never understood this "as a way of stepping back, slowing down and soaking it all in." argument with respect to using film cameras.
I shoot street candids using only manual focus, mostly mechanical film cameras (both Nikon rangefinders and SLRs) and can assure you I couldn't get some of the photos I get if this was even remotely true.

 

[Bill Kapinski]

I don't think this happens as much as it used to but, it always seemed to me that the camera that everyone thought was best was the one that was the pro camera when that person truly got into photography or turned pro. For me the F3 had just came out and that was "the" camera and to me it still is. I had friends and co-workers and to them it was the F2 which was "the" camera for their time. I knew a few old timers and for them it was the F. Funny because now I am an old timer. Either way you can't go wrong. Best is to try both if you can and decide which you like better. Or better yet keep both. I remember a 1984 American Photographer article on a photographer ( old age kicking in again because I forgot his name) that shot the olympics. He used F3p, but he also had F2's that were lubricated special for the winter olympics and extreme cold. I photographer I work with is an ex PJ and I remember seeing his F3's when he worked for the paper. Beat to snot. I think he said he figured he ran 10,000 miles of film through them or something like that. So give one a try and see if you like it. You can probably sell it for what you paid for it if you don't like it and then try the other.
Now for some photos. I don't own an F3 anymore but I have an F2 and a F

 

[nobbylon]

How so? Did you change the focusing screen on yours? It has the green dot thing like other AF Nikons, but does not have a proper MF screen IIRC.

Yes I was surprised too. I've owned and used every F camera and currently still have F2, F3, F5 and the F6. The F6 is standard apart from a DK17M eyepeice magnifier which I've fitted to all my Nikon's.
Focusing manually with it is more like using my Leicaflex where the image transition from 'out to in' focus seems to be more defined ie it just pops into focus. In this respect it is much easier to use than all the others.

 

[nobbylon]

The F6 is a very different camera than the F2. People get F2s now because cameras like the F6 are everything that they don't want. It's basically an AF DSLR that happens to shoot film!
I use Fs, F2s, M3s etc because they are the opposite of my digital cameras. They are mechanical, they don't need batteries, and they (yes even the F2!) are small in comparison to stuff like the F6. Autofocus? Don't want it. Autowind? Don't want it. AE? Don't want it. Battery dependancy? Don't want it.

I disagree. The F6 can be used just like all the others in manual. My main lens for use on the F6 is a manual focus 28 AIS, I sometimes use manual metering and the debate about battery dependancy will rage on forever. In 40 years of picture taking I have never ever run out of battery power and missed a picture whether i've been on the high street in my home town or in the remote parts of the Himalaya.
I like all things mechanical and I've enjoyed many different mechanical cameras over the time I've been taking pictures. I recently bought a K1000 and a KM for reasons of nostalgia. I still use my M2 occasionally along with the SL however for everyday ease of use this F6 truly is the better camera. It also feels a lot smaller than one imagines.
I'll leave it at that because I've already caused us to wander off from the OP's original question, sorry for that!

 

[Huss]

I've never understood this "as a way of stepping back, slowing down and soaking it all in." argument with respect to using film cameras.
I shoot street candids using only manual focus, mostly mechanical film cameras (both Nikon rangefinders and SLRs) and can assure you I couldn't get some of the photos I get if this was even remotely true.

You don't have to shoot slowly if you don't want to. This is obvious as these cameras were the pro work horses of the film era.
But, in this digital era it is really pleasant to use them that way if so inclined.

 

[Archlich]

One word for the F6 is how astonishingly quiet the film advance is. Sounds just like a digital camera, a soft shutter click, you don't realize the transportation until you see the rewind lever rotates and the counter proceeds. Not even the Hexar, which under the silent mode would still make a tiny whining noise, comes close. If they ever made this technology widely available...

 

[VertovSvilova]

I disagree. The F6 can be used just like all the others in manual. My main lens for use on the F6 is a manual focus 28 AIS, I sometimes use manual metering and the debate about battery dependancy will rage on forever. In 40 years of picture taking I have never ever run out of battery power and missed a picture whether i've been on the high street in my home town or in the remote parts of the Himalaya.
I like all things mechanical and I've enjoyed many different mechanical cameras over the time I've been taking pictures. I recently bought a K1000 and a KM for reasons of nostalgia. I still use my M2 occasionally along with the SL however for everyday ease of use this F6 truly is the better camera. It also feels a lot smaller than one imagines.
I'll leave it at that because I've already caused us to wander off from the OP's original question, sorry for that!

I have to admit, and with the 'all mechanical nostalgia' set aside, the F6 is one of the most functional and ergonomic film cameras I've ever used. And yes, you can use it like a mechanical camera (as even Df owners would argue 🙂) Sure, batteries are nice to not have to consider, but for me the pure functionality of the F6 overrides that. And as was already mentioned, the film advance is incredibly quiet as is the shutter (and almost totally silent in CS mode.) Plus you get a fully weather sealed and super strong body.

btw, some interesting F6 info and history here: http://www.nikonf6.net/

 

[Wulfthari]

The F6 is a very different camera than the F2. People get F2s now because cameras like the F6 are everything that they don't want. It's basically an AF DSLR that happens to shoot film!
I use Fs, F2s, M3s etc because they are the opposite of my digital cameras. They are mechanical, they don't need batteries, and they (yes even the F2!) are small in comparison to stuff like the F6. Autofocus? Don't want it. Autowind? Don't want it. AE? Don't want it. Battery dependancy? Don't want it.

Agree 110%...if you want to use a manual camera why an F6? It's like to buy the latest model of computer with I don't know how much RAM and then play Pacman.

I'm not a professional, but I try to shoot as well as I can, I don't autofocus, autoexposure etc..I WANT to take the picture by myself, usually with rangefinders and also some SLR I don't even use a lightmeter and I prefer to risk to get a bad exposure, but at least I learn something new.

I've never understood this "as a way of stepping back, slowing down and soaking it all in." argument with respect to using film cameras.
I shoot street candids using only manual focus, mostly mechanical film cameras (both Nikon rangefinders and SLRs) and can assure you I couldn't get some of the photos I get if this was even remotely true.

Besides that I don't get the "slow camera" approach: serious professionals of the past have always taken action shots without all the electronic stuff that is put inside, I don't claim I can teach anything to anybody but last week I casually assisted to a falconry show in a medieval castle, I went there completely unprepared, just with my Nikon F2AS and my 50 mm f1.4 lens,and I took this picture of a young Andean Condor at 1/250s, f5.6, hyperfocal because the guy was so quick I could barely saw it descending:

This vulture was too low and too far away, it didn't come out that great:

But I took a good shot of him landing:

According to the "slow down theory" I couldn't take any of these pics without autofocus, autoexposure, autoeverything! Nevertheless I made it.

I took the following pictures with a 1940 Leica IIIb, a rangefinder with no lightmeter, separate windows for rangefinder and viewfinder and a collapsible lens, on the fly:

The "model" was a gray squirrel that jumped and ran around that bench like a maniac and for a fraction of second came VERY close (see last picture), almost at minimum focus distance. It was also a very wet day so the pics have been underexposed but nevertheless these pics aren't that bad due to the conditions.

Now, are you sure you need all the electronic gear to take action pictures? IMO photographers, especially pros, have just become lazy.

 

[nobbylon]

Agree 110%...if you want to use a manual camera why an F6? It's like to buy the latest model of computer with I don't know how much RAM and then play Pacman.

Now, are you sure you need all the electronic gear to take action pictures? IMO photographers, especially pros, have just become lazy.

In my own case I didn't say I wanted to use it as a manual camera, I said it could be.
An F6 because,
a/ In manual focus it is easier to focus than any other Nikon period.
b/ in auto focus and AE it allows me to nail focus and exposure and go home not wondering if I have the shot or not!
A camera at this level is 'to me' for taking pictures with and the easier I can acheive that then the more pleasurable my day is. I don't want to guess exposure or focus to 'challenge' myself. I want the picture to be what I imagined it to be before I took it and not some random hit or miss luck shot.
As for your last comment re pro photogs having become lazy, well, I'll leave them to inform you on how hard it is to make a living at it! 😀

I wish I'd never mentioned F6 now. F2 or F3? F3 all the way.

 

[Wulfthari]

Nothing personal, mine was a reflection on a certain attitude I've read around that basically states it's impossible to take "action pictures" with a manual camera and you need af, autoexposure, auto-everything. And IMO one important part of film photography that makes you a better photographer is that indeed you have just one chances to take your shoot and you won't know it if you nail it until you see the negatives...it's like going hunting wild boars: You just have one shot and you have to score it, or you fail.

That's IMO, of course.

 

[rbsinto]

You don't have to shoot slowly if you don't want to. This is obvious as these cameras were the pro work horses of the film era.
But, in this digital era it is really pleasant to use them that way if so inclined.

You can say that about any camera, analog or digital.

 

[paparazzi mano]

Hi

This thread is just too addictive. Could anyone tell me where I can find the viewfinder for the F2? Want the ones with the sharp top and no meter

Thanks!

 

[DominikDUK]

The High Speed F2 could do 12 fps and was one of the fastest film bodies. Sports photography was done with plate cameras look at the work of Lartigue. Jesus we have become wimps the Speed of Shooting is not dependant on the camera but on the shooter. As for which is better the F2 if you want 100% Manual and F3 if you want the AE function otherwise the pure F is good enough for 98% of all photographic genres. Bad things the Mirror lock up and for some the film changing other than that it is just as capable as the newer bodies but a lot sexier imo.