Nikon F2 vs Leica with no meter

not great comparison but for me, nikon F with prism vs. Leica M are a tie. I enjoy using both.
 
I use a Leica M because my Leica glass doesn't fit on my F2AS. I use Leica lenses because as a long time Nikon user I think Leica "glass" (28~90) is subjectively better. I use a Nikon for wide angle (16~28), Teles (135~600) and zoom lenses.


If I coul only afford one outfit it would be a Nikkormat with a wide to long zoom lens.
 
raid said:
Why would you favor a cheap Nikkormat over the awesome F2AS?
Click to expand...


Just putting in the cheap option. But the Nikkormats (I have one or two) were good, solid bodies. It's the glass attached to the body that makes the difference. Of the answers of why Nikon F2 over the Leica M no one mentioned the glass.
 
raid said:
Why would you favor a cheap Nikkormat over the awesome F2AS?
Click to expand...

Nikkormats are less expensive, but there's nothing cheap about them. Certainly not in build quality or robustness.

I write this as a very long time owner and user of five F2's of various flavors, plus two Nikkormats.

The Nikkormat FT3 would be the period-equivalent of the F2AS in terms of how they both meter with Nikkor lenses (viz. they both meter AI lenses wide open and don't require the Twist Ritual, they both require stop-down metering of pre-AI lenses).

That said, in comparison to the F2AS, the FT3 gives you:

- a self-timer, but you can't vary the delay
- no long timed-exposures (to 10 sec on an F2)
- prism isn't removable
- speeds only to 1/1000
- no aperture readout in finder
= still have mirror lock-up
= still have depth-of-field preview
= still have centerweighted metering
= still can read the meter externally
+ much better flash mount

Considering the lower price and feeling of solidity, the Nikkormat doesn't surrender much for the vast majority of photographic tasks.
 
Back in the day (1970-1980), I used Nikon F's and F2's for my professional work often toting two F's with a 24mm on one and a 85mm on the other. Don't think I even owned any thing between those two focal lengths. Today, I don't know why but I never owned a Nikkormat, perhaps thinking the F's were professional and Nikkormats were for amateurs.

With the benefit of hindsight, camera snobbery is pretty stupid. I have a plain prism Nikon F with a 55f3.5 Micro Nikkor which I still dearly love.
 
My background was similar to ktmrider's.

Back in the late 60s and early 70s, I used plain prism Nikon F's and F2's for my professional work often toting two bodies with a 35mm on one and an 85mm on the other. The only focal length I owned between those two focal lengths was a 55mm f/3.5 Micro Nikkor. I did, however, usually carry a 180mm f/2.8 for telephoto work.

I had access to Nikkormats, but never owned or used them because I never liked their ergonomics. Instead, I used Pentax Spotmatics as my backup cameras because in my hands, with the exception of the screw-mount, they handled more like my F and F2.

When I needed to shoot without the noise of my F2 or my Spotmatic SLRs, I used a rangefinder (Canon Canonet or Leica M6).


Nikon F2 by Narsuitus, on Flickr
 
I learned photography on a nikkormat
It was my first camera as a young Ninth Grader taking photography...

thats what I loved about the leica M5... similar in theory, different in look,
a needle meter, YUM
 
I was just wondering about the love for a Nikkormat!
I still own a Nikkormat and an F2. I agree with your collective assessment.
These cameras were built very well. The glass used was most important.
 
A Nikkormat Ftn was my first Nikon product, but I far preferred the handling and 100% viewfinder of the F (non meter prism) that followed it.
 
Fraser said:
The coolest Nikkormat is the EL just for where the battery goes !
Click to expand...

Heh. I forgot about that - it's crazy! I wonder how many people totally forgot about the hidden compartment and left a battery in there to corrode...

One attractive feature for me about the EL (as well as the FE series and FM3a) is the shutter speed scale with the black needle, blue needle, and colored zones. Nikon really designed that well. Only the Canon EF ("Black Beauty") has a sexier viewfinder.

The satin chrome on the dials and knobs of the EL is tastefully done. You don't see that type of refinement today.
 
Ko.Fe. said:
I think some :rolleyes: are misleading and confusing zones focusing and focusing at hyperfocal distance where it allows to have maximum DOF.

Here is setting your rig as fixed focus camera at hyperfocal distance, which will works with small apertures and wide lenses only.
And then here is zone focusing. Zone means not entire coverage, but by the zones.
Even with 20mm lens and f4 I have three zones at least. Close, middle and far where it is only in focus. Only one zone is in focus. Short focus throw and focus tab allows quick switching among these focus zones.

With constant practice and using of the same rig, it is possible to zone focus at f2.8 of 35mm lens.

Also some cameras have zones focusing marks. Like Olympus Trip and Smena. One person, group portrait and building. Those are focusing zones icons, marks.
Click to expand...

The early 25mm snapshot skopars had click-stops for these zones. i secretly wish that Ricoh would produce a gr with a similar approach. The menu and button approach is distracting.
 
Vince Lupo said:
Really whatever floats your boat is fine by me - I don't think there's any one or 'correct' way to get a photo that pleases you.
Click to expand...

Thank you for sharing this sentiment. It seems that when people feel the need to justify their choices that the train most often starts to separate from the rails.

A simple "this is what I use because it is what I prefer to use" answer might have nothing to do with costs involved, perceived quality, durability, repairability, size, weight, or the ability to deliver whiter whites in the wash for that matter.
 
I spend some time with Nikkormat by now. I think some less heavier Nikon camera with wider lens is very effective kit. 20, 24, 28 lenses for F mount costed me next to nothing. Most of them ain't too huge or heavy. With wide lenses like this I don't struggle to focus with SLR.
But 35mm and 50mm is where I'm only confident with RF for manual focusing.
I'm thinking of trying FM3a to see if I could use it as my main film camera.
My Nikon lenses are same focus rotation as Leica and focus tab is addable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom