So ... Just how good is the Nikon F6?

Keith

Keith

The best camera is one that still works!
Local time
9:19 PM
Joined
May 5, 2006
Messages
19,242
Sometimes after a weekend of trying to shoot subject material that really stretches a rangefinder's capabilities ... ie children dogs and anything else that has no respect for my beyond middle age vision capabilities ... I think about something else for these scenarios. This was actually a friend's 40th birthday party held at a croquet club ... I offered to take photographs of the days events and I found the whole rangefinder thing a little taxing to be honest which brings me to the question that heads this post ... how good is the Nikon F6?

Every now and then I stumble ocross a review or write up about the F6 claiming that it's probably the best film SLR ever made and repesents Nikon at the peak of their powers before they decided that this camera was the end of the line for film SLR development!

I would appreciate some input from those who have this camera and may use it semi professionally (or not) ... what are it's strengths and weaknesses ... what would you expect to pay for a decent used example ... would a couple of decent fast lenses, say a 35mm and a 50mm, cost an arm and a leg ... etc etc?

I've read Ken Rockwell's glowing report and he seems to thing it's God's gift to 35mm film photography ... and I know he never exaggerates! :p
 
F100 is pretty great and cheap - it's the one I have my eye on. And the controls are laid out in the same patterns as the D700. I think it may have come from the same design team.
 
The F6 is arguably the most advanced film camera ever made, and is likely to keep that status as film camera development all but dead now.

A money loser for Nikon, it was made when Digital was clearly the future. Nikon only did it as a last good bye to film.

Stephen
 
I've been sooooooo tempted by the F6 many times. Especially with used samples now down around 90,000 to 100,000 yen here in Japan. An awesome machine for sure, and what a finder!!!
 
The biggest drawback to this era film camera is that the quartz display screen will eventually bleed. I wouldn't waste my money on it. I feel if you can't take good photos with a manual film camera then an F6 won't help you much....ok now bite my head off & tell me how wrong I am!....but I am right about the quartz display, I've seen it first hand.
 
gb hill said:
The biggest drawback to this era film camera is that the quartz display screen will eventually bleed. I wouldn't waste my money on it. I feel if you can't take good photos with a manual film camera then an F6 won't help you much....ok now bite my head off & tell me how wrong I am!....but I am right about the quartz display, I've seen it first hand.
Click to expand...

You've seen it first hand on an F6?
 
f6

f6

Great fit in hands, super clear viewfinder, easy to read lcd and viewfinder displays. Very well balanced and super fit and finish; on par with a leica mp and better than an M8 (I own all three). Precise, quick shutter release, no mirror bounce, and refined, smooth rewind. Nice grip and covering.
Very useable with MF and AF lenses; I'd recommend choosing from following the Nikon 20/3.5 AIS, 28/2.8 AIS, 35/2 AF, 50/1.4 AF, 105/2.5 AIS, 180/2.8 AIS, and a 24-85 f/3.5-4.5 AF.

The bad: batteries last about 20 rolls maybe, and I wish it was smaller.
 
How is the viewfinder, compared to, say, an FE2 for manual focusing? Is it as large? Does it have the same kind of 'snap,' or is it more like an F100 - meant for AF lenses primarily?
 
Nikon F6 was introduced in October 2004. [F5 :1996-2004; F100 :1998-2006]

So essentially we have until 2012, which would be the typical 8 year production run.

Some info:

Nikon
http://imaging.nikon.com/products/imaging/lineup/f6/index.htm

Nikon Spec Sheet
http://chsvimg.nikon.com/products/imaging/lineup/filmcamera/slr/f6/pdf/f6_spec.pdf

Nikon Brochure
http://chsvimg.nikon.com/products/imaging/lineup/filmcamera/slr/f6/pdf/f6_20p.pdf

Nikon Press Release
http://www.nikon.com/about/news/2004/0916_02.htm


Reviews:

http://www.olegnovikov.com/technical/f6/f6.shtml

http://www.bythom.com/F6.htm

http://shutterbug.com/equipmentreviews/35mm_cameras/0405nikon/

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/f6.htm



Nikon Creative Light System
http://www.olegnovikov.com/technical/nikoncls/cls.shtml



I believe that after production is non-existent [no more], Nikon will continue to service the F6 for another 7 years after final production year. [please correct me if I am wrong].


Mark
UIO
 
jonmanjiro said:
You've seen it first hand on an F6?
Click to expand...

I knew someone would ask me that!:D Not on an F6 but I just checked and the F6 isn't quartz. They use a lcd which is better but they can still go bad. Guess it's just me but I haven't had any luck in the longetivity department with LCD's or quartz panels on electronics. Minolta's of the 80's & certain cameras of the 90's were prone to bleed.
 
gb hill said:
The biggest drawback to this era film camera is that the quartz display screen will eventually bleed. I wouldn't waste my money on it. I feel if you can't take good photos with a manual film camera then an F6 won't help you much....ok now bite my head off & tell me how wrong I am!....but I am right about the quartz display, I've seen it first hand.
Click to expand...


No I won't bite your head off ... but the point I was trying to make is that when you're attempting to get a shot of someone's kid running towards you at full tilt and you're shooting at f2.8 a rangefinder is not the tool for the job. It's got zilch to do with my abilities with a manual camera ... rangefinder or SLR!

You may be lucky and succeed if you're quick and have twenty year old eyes (which I don't) but with a decent auto focus SLR you'll get it every time. I don't miss my D70s (much :p) because digital ain't my thing but I do remember that in the above described situation the auto focus on the Nikon would nail it's target every time.
 
Well Keith, if you thought the D70s was fast and accurate, you ain't seen nothing yet. I "only" have an F5, but the AF cranks!
 
I've still got two F5 bodies from before I went digital, I must have got mine back in 96' or 97' so they'd be early examples. I've taken them everywhere and put goodness knows how many rolls through them throughout their professional years and through their years of retirement since I went digi. They were serviced whilst I used them for work but they haven't had a service since and they've been through the Sahara, Atlas mountains and countless trips to the seaside ( what? I'm an English photographer, its virtually a law) and never put a foot wrong.

The F6, which I've never used, is supposed to be an even better camera from what I've read from reviews and heard from colleagues. I'm sure you can pick one up at a decent price easily enough, though if you wouldn't use it all that much I would suggest bearing in mind the far cheaper and extremely robust F5. The AF is superb.....pah! The whole camera is superb.

Just my tuppence in the pot!
 
Just out of curiosity - how does the F6 compare to the F5, for weight and bulk, I had an F5 a few years ago, magnificent camera! - but a bit too big and heavy for me!.
Dave.
 
OurManInTangier said:
I've still got two F5 bodies from before I went digital, I must have got mine back in 96' or 97' so they'd be early examples. I've taken them everywhere and put goodness knows how many rolls through them throughout their professional years and through their years of retirement since I went digi. They were serviced whilst I used them for work but they haven't had a service since and they've been through the Sahara, Atlas mountains and countless trips to the seaside ( what? I'm an English photographer, its virtually a law) and never put a foot wrong.

The F6, which I've never used, is supposed to be an even better camera from what I've read from reviews and heard from colleagues. I'm sure you can pick one up at a decent price easily enough, though if you wouldn't use it all that much I would suggest bearing in mind the far cheaper and extremely robust F5. The AF is superb.....pah! The whole camera is superb.

Just my tuppence in the pot!
Click to expand...


Simon ... doing a little googling tells me that that the F5 is a pretty good camera and not far behind the F6 in performance ... not quite as user friendly I gather and the F6 was blessed with nicer ergonomics and less weight.

Big difference in price ... it seems you can get an F5 for a few hundred dollars and the F6 still commands well over a grand depending on condition. Realistically an F5 would be nearer my budget and allow me more opportunity to find a lens or two ... the F6 is a very nice looking SLR though!
 
Another option is an F100. It's a bit smaller than an F6, but still has 90% of the functionality. AF is apparently very good, too. You can find one for under $200 fairly easily. That's a lotta bang for your buck.
 
Dave Wilkinson said:
Just out of curiosity - how does the F6 compare to the F5, for weight and bulk, I had an F5 a few years ago, magnificent camera! - but a bit too big and heavy for me!.
Dave.
Click to expand...


Dave ... I was reading somewhere that a change in battery technology was the main weight saving on the F6 ... the slight downside being fully charged batteries are only good for about twenty rolls and limit the frame rate to about 5 fps unless you add a grip with extra batteries which allows up to 8 fps ... and of course puts the weight back on! :p
 
jonmanjiro said:
Another option is an F100. It's a bit smaller than an F6, but still has 90% of the functionality. AF is apparently very good, too. You can find one for under $200 fairly easily. That's a lotta bang for your buck.
Click to expand...

And of course an F100 with a 50mm 1.8 lens just sold in the classifieds for not much! :rolleyes: :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom