Not getting on with the Nikon F

Austerby

Austerby

Well-known
Local time
10:00 AM
Joined
Feb 7, 2007
Messages
1,069
Gosh, I'm finding this such an old-fashioned lump: it makes a Leica M3 seem quite 21st Century. It's really showing it's age now and not in a good way.

I have been using my Nikon FE since I bought it new in 1983 and I'm finding the F just too dated. The FE still holds up very well - the F is definitely a vintage camera.

Such a shame - I was hoping it would really be like a Nikon rangefinder with a pentaprism on the top.
 
Just what I felt after having gone through lengths to find a nice black F with a plain prism.

I ditched it and have used my Nikkormats since. They do the same with a built-in meter that can be read from the top and are just as sturdy.
 
Last edited:
buzzardkid said:
Just what I felt after having gone thriugh lebgths to find a nice black F with a plain prism.

I ditched it and have used my Nikkormats since. They do the same with a built-in meter that can be read from the top and are just as sturdy.
Click to expand...

I agree. My Nikkormat FT2 sounds and handles better than the F I had. Although, I have to admit these old cameras are quite the eccentric characters after all these years.
 
I went around and around on this and finally settled on the FG. It's got the large finder image of an Olympus OM1 (but with better eye relief), and is about the same size, but includes a really comfy handgrip, and has aperture-priority and program modes, AND TTL flash metering. Not only that, but they're only about 50 bucks to buy--if it breaks, throw it away and buy another. I hate to say this, but it's my favorite of all the 35mm film cameras I have ever used, in terms of features vs weight vs comfort. I keep it on "A" all the time, and my lens close to, or at, wide-open. It simply works, and I think it's a real sleeper.

Also currently have and don't use anymore: FM, FA, N90.
 
I'm shooting currently with FE2, FA, and F3. The Fe2 is my old standby, but I find it wants to overexpose (both of them--I have two), while the FA and F3 give better exposures with color slide film. The FA handles a lot like the FE2, a thing I like about it. It's almost the same camera. The F3, being an F, handles a lot like an F, feels strong and solid, gets me good exposures, lets me see the whole field with its 100% high-point finder--and I like these things about the F3. I suppose an F might strike me as too old-fashioned; but not my F3!

Why do I bother with the FE2? I'm used to using it with Velvia 50. So when I want to shoot Velvia 50, I know how to get the right exposures with it.
 
mdarnton said:
I went around and around on this and finally settled on the FG. It's got the large finder image of an Olympus OM1 (but with better eye relief), and is about the same size, but includes a really comfy handgrip, and has aperture-priority and program modes, AND TTL flash metering. Not only that, but they're only about 50 bucks to buy--if it breaks, throw it away and buy another. I hate to say this, but it's my favorite of all the 35mm film cameras I have ever used, in terms of features vs weight vs comfort. I keep it on "A" all the time, and my lens close to or at wide-open. I think it's a real sleeper.

Also currently have and don't use anymore: FM, FA, N90.
Click to expand...

The FG is a very good sleeper of a camera. The small chassis won't appeal to everyone but it's a very good little camera.
 
To love the F, it helps to have a real use for its amazing modularity and versatility. And maybe most importantly, for its ability to show up for press work day after day, year after year, cranking out roll after roll after roll after roll after roll after roll....

You can appreciate all that stuff (and things like the way F viewfinders show you 100 percent of the frame) without NEEDING it, of course.

But if you're an occasional shooter (and that certainly describes me today), a Nikkormat or FM or FG or even an EM will feel more like it was designed for what you do. Because it was.

I don't have any M3 time, so I won't try to parse the M3/F comparison. It does, however, strike me that the F and the M3 share an undeniable fundamental seriousness. There are darn few F or M3 shooters who do anything like pushing the limits of those cameras' capabilities.
 
Oh, I have a Nikon F coming tomorrow and now I read this :)

I currently have an M3. I hope I get along with the Nikon although as it will be my first non digital SLR

Richard
 
Yes, I really disliked the feel of OMs when I used them--nothing to hold onto. The FG handgrip makes all the difference to me. I carry a camera 100% of the time, so tiny is good.
 
The FG is a winner... After a lot of research, I bought a new one for my parents as a gift. A little distressing, as I was a Pentax fan, but I felt the FG was just a better choice for that kind of camera. I added a Tamron 35-80mm for them.

Unfortunately, they left it hanging in the front closet of their waterfront house until both body and lens were destroyed by the humid salt air. Strangely, their older Olympus Pen FT survived this environment.
 
hmmmm.....

I've been here too. At one point, had only an F2. Went shooting, and felt that it was too inconvenient to have to use a handheld meter. That triggered a bout of looking for a DP1 meter.

Then had to find an F again. Finally landed a mint black F; I think they look so beautiful.

But sure, I know what you mean. The F doesn't have the elegant feel of a Leica M.

....Vick


buzzardkid said:
Just what I felt after having gone through lengths to find a nice black F with a plain prism.

I ditched it and have used my Nikkormats since. They do the same with a built-in meter that can be read from the top and are just as sturdy.
Click to expand...
 
The reality is that there's only one camera that provides a pretty seamless shift from Leica rangefinder to SLR ... and I'm not even going to say what it is. :angel:

But it's not a Nikon F that's for sure!
 
I have no problem with the Nikon F. I like the sounds it makes, I like shooting with it. It is a real piece of practical machinery.
 
RichW said:
Oh, I have a Nikon F coming tomorrow and now I read this :)

I currently have an M3. I hope I get along with the Nikon although as it will be my first SLR

Richard
Click to expand...

Don't sweat it the Nikon F is a great camera in every way esp that bright viewfinder and ease of focus. If you need A priority and light weight get an FM3A. Make sure you give the F a fair trial you'll be glad you did.
 
Couldn't agree more with the OP. I prefer the FM's and especially FE's to the original F and the Nikkkormats in almost every way. Only thing better is an F3, and even there size is a tradeoff.
 
I own several Nikon SLRs including NikKormats FTn FT3 EL2, the FG and the F of all my Nikons I like the plain F with photomic FTN finder the best. The reasons are very simple its Finder and its weight. I like my Cameras a little on the heavier side might be one of the reason I don't like the OM series or I am not too happy with the FG. The F is a tank built to be used in situations where a tank is required. The FE might have all the bells and whistles of a modern camera but I doubt that it will survive as long as a Nikon F in pro use.
The ergonomics of the F are not up to date but who needs ergonomics anyways.

Dominik
 
I only have one Nikon F and I think I understand what the OP is getting at. Always preferred to use an F2AS, F2 with DP-12 finder, and ai/ais lenses. Just much more convenient to use than the F and much the same camera.

Bob
 
Though not a personal fan of the F I do admire it. If I was going somewhere that required a camera that could be treated indifferently over an extended period without problems I'd be thinking Nikon F.

As much as I love the OM series I don't see them in this way!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom