nikonos advice/suggestions

msbarnes

msbarnes

Well-known
Local time
4:21 PM
Joined
Jul 10, 2011
Messages
841
So I'm going to Mexico in a few weeks and I'm thinking of picking up a Nikonos.

I'm not doing any serious underwater photography but I intend on using it above and below the water at the beach and swimming pools.

Not sure on the body but I will get the 35mm f2.5 and maybe the 28mm f3.5 (the underwater only version).

Anyways.

-Which Nikonos camera is your favorite and why? I'm still reading up on it and it seems that most prefer the III and V. I like the mechanical shutter aspect of the III but I don't really have an underwater meter and I am uncertain how to exposure for underwater. The I-III look better to me but the ergonomics seem to be better for the IV-V.

-Are the viewfinders of all the Nikonos comparable? Or are some better than the others?

-Are there any cheap/inexpensive underwater handheld meters?

-Is guess exposing underwater difficult? I plan on sticking with negative film and erring on overexposure.

Any cool underwater people photographs to share?
 
I've owned the Nikonos V with the 35mm f/2.5 on two occasions. Great little camera. The first time I had it, I sold it because I tried getting out of 35mm film, only to be pulled back in once I started shooting with RFs. Bought another one and ended up selling it because my sisters bought me an underwater digital camera. Both times they ended up in fellow RFFer hands.

I've never used the III, but I'd certainly recommend the V. I never had any problems using the built-in meter. And like you said, anytime I was a little concerned about it, I just used negative film and overexposed it a bit.

My Nikonos V shots are here:
http://www.flickr.com/search/?w=19492597@N00&q=nikonos
 
Michael, I'm here again. I have used my Nikonos II in Mexico. Banderas Bay is not clear so you might have to get a boat for snorkel or suba diving. A good spot is Los Arcos and Gemelo Beach near Mismaloya. I used underwater cameras in the pool at the resort I stay in, but again the pool isn't crystal clear. Just under water seems to work well though.

Don't know anything about new Nikonos cameras, I had mine for 40 years so I quit checking them out long ago. The shutter on mine is quirky but I'm used to it.

As I don't have an underwater meter, I just use C-41 and guess. I open a stop from sunny 16 at about 7ft depending on the clarity of the water and time of day.

I'll find a few UW photos this afternoon.

This is a Canon AS-6 which goes down 20 feet. It is a cheap camera but has some advantages (meter, flash, auto-wind):

6756622687_39ce7a162c.jpg


4829740152_fd58ec1e3b.jpg
 
Thanks for all of the advice!

Thanks John, I was inspired by your PV album. I liked your underwater shots and so i started looking into Nikonos.
 
I have only had the nikonos v w/ 35 and 80 plus the 28 land only. They are good cameras. I have used in Caribbean, Hawaii and Tahiti.

However given your lens choices.. I was wondering how deep u plan to go.. If it is snorkeling.. A interesting option might be the Minolta weathermatic dual (the 35mm version not APS). If I remember correctly, af, 28 or 35 lens and about maybe 15ft or so depth. And bright yellow :p

The various version of the nikonos is much easier to find though.

Gary
 
Just go with the V. It's newest, has the meter, and the seals seem the most effective. And as you said, it's quite similar in handling to a typical 35mm camera. They are plentiful and you should be able to find one for a reasonable price. The III is the "classic" Nikonos look but I think collectors are driving up the price. (One thing I have noticed about the II and the III, which I haven't seen remarked on elsewhere -- if you engage the shutter lock, the camera will still permit you to wind on film, so without thinking about it you can push the wind/shutter paddle a few times and miss a bunch of frames. No such issue with the IV-A or V.)
 
KoNickon said:
Just go with the V. It's newest, has the meter, and the seals seem the most effective. And as you said, it's quite similar in handling to a typical 35mm camera. They are plentiful and you should be able to find one for a reasonable price. The III is the "classic" Nikonos look but I think collectors are driving up the price. (One thing I have noticed about the II and the III, which I haven't seen remarked on elsewhere -- if you engage the shutter lock, the camera will still permit you to wind on film, so without thinking about it you can push the wind/shutter paddle a few times and miss a bunch of frames. No such issue with the IV-A or V.)
Click to expand...

I agree, and my II has that shutter issue.
 
I kayak a lot and bought an old Nikonos-III years back to carry with me inside my boat. Great camera, but the lack of a built-in meter was a hindrance. I sold the Nikonos-III and bought a used Nikonos-V. Much better camera, at least for how I use it.

This is a shot taken with my old Nikonos-III. This is the "America" which sunk off the coast of Isle Royale (in Lake Superior) in June, 1928. I didn't have to dive to take this pic. As I kayaked, I stuck my hand, with camera, into Lake Superior and guessed as to where the boat was. I guessed right.

sunkenboat.jpg


Jim B.
 
Long time ago (1995?), but I had an accessory underwater meter that I had bought for my Nikonos-III. I stuck that in the water, pointed it to where the boat was, and read what the meter reading was. Clumsy and slow, but it did work.

Jim B.
 
Is it difficult to guess exposure underwater at shallow depths? with negative film. I'm thinking of opening up 1 stop if the water is clear and 2-3 stops if not. Or does it vary considerably.
 
Unless you are dead set on using film, I'd recommend one of those waterproof/shockproof P&S digital cameras that will go down to 30 feet without any external housing. And they are reasonably priced.
 
jett said:
Is it difficult to guess exposure underwater at shallow depths? with negative film. I'm thinking of opening up 1 stop if the water is clear and 2-3 stops if not. Or does it vary considerably.
Click to expand...

It varies with skylight, turbidity, depth....Nikonos shooters going deeper than snorkel depths packed big flashes. The thumbnails I attached above were shot on Fuji 800 @6-8 ft depth with a lot of subtropical light above. I metered for the surface--quite bright--and shot at f11-f8.

Most of the Nikonos enthusiast sites are chock full of exposure tips. Your plan sounds fine, though.
 
rhl-oregon said:
It varies with skylight, turbidity, depth....Nikonos shooters going deeper than snorkel depths packed big flashes. The thumbnails I attached above were shot on Fuji 800 @6-8 ft depth with a lot of subtropical light above. I metered for the surface--quite bright--and shot at f11-f8.

Most of the Nikonos enthusiast sites are chock full of exposure tips. Your plan sounds fine, though.
Click to expand...

To this I would add that UW photography has a huge range of challenges. Even in the very clearest water (or so it seems) micro fragments (algae, plankton, normal turbidity from bottom silt etc) suck up light like all get-out. And that same overall turbidity makes flash photography a nightmare. I have not shot film UW for years but I will say it was a hell of a challenge to both get the exposure and the estimate of distance right and I often considered myself to be lucky to get one good shot from a whole roll.

In your case to estimate exposure you may be able to make up a table over time as you gain experience of what works, of estimated brightness changes due to depth etc and then mark this using crayon or texta on a small piece of rigid plastic board to take down with you. At least that's what I would do. As you point out, print film has at least 2 stops latitude in one direction and 1 in the other. Sometimes more depending on the film (I have no idea what's still available). The bad news is that slide film generally gives much nicer results UW - if you get it right (which is much harder of course due to the limited exposure flexibility of this kind of film). But the colors are much nicer with better contrast and saturation. (Many print films are overly sensitive to blue light) This may also mean there is value in using a pinkish filter if you can find one- you used to be able to get a special holder for filters on Nikonos lenses by the way. These are needed as without them a filter might break from water pressure. The filter holders allow water pressure to equalize on both sides of the filter. This would be an extra challenge for exposure as well of course as allowance has to be made for it.

Also I would add that a good bet is to use as wide a lens as you can afford (UW ultra-wides tend to be expensive). Wider lenses have more depth of field which is important given that you have no rangefinder. In addition this allows you to get closer to a subject and hence there is less impact on the image from all that turbidity in the water.

Besides because the way water bends light you get a kind of cropping effect much as you do with a digital camera's cropped sensor -a 35mm lens when used under water (I am still talking fill frame / film here) gives a similar field of view under water to a 50mm lens (still talking full frame) above water. Hence the importance of an extra wide lens if you can get one.

PS there are underwater exposure meters - at least there used to be. I know divers who had them for their Nik 111s etc.. Try eBay. I cannot recall what they used to cost. But I would expect to be able to buy one second hand relatively cheaply these days as so few people have need for them
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom