Nikon F or not ??

1970-01-20-022250830.jpg
I thought the F2 would be the ultimate SLR for my needs but last year it got replaced by the Nikon F. It might be sample variation but the F sounded quieter. It looks even better too. Both had the plain prisms.
 
I have been a Nikon F user for fifty years and still use it. It does everything I need it to. It feels like an extension of my hand. When I have to photograph something important I use a Nikon F. I own eight of them, attached is a photo of my first one with an 85mm f1.8 Nikkor. I used this F in high school as a yearbook photographer, in college at Brooks Institute of Photography and a couple of assignments at work, I am a retired Industrial/Scientific photographer.
 

Attachments

  • photo109821.jpg
    photo109821.jpg
    26 KB · Views: 10
Exactly Fjåll, so much of choosing a camera, a tool, a musical instrument has nothing to do with which is better. I first Nikon product was a Nikkormat FTn. I was a student with not much money.... but the big clang or of shutter and the serrated edge of the film advance lever didn't sit well with me.....within days i took if back and got a plain prism F. Like the Leica M3 or M2, there's just something quintessentially 'right' about the Nikon F.
Subsequently I used F2, F3 (great ergonomics w the MD4), F4 (least favourite), F5 (swansong....big battery problems with a new one back in the day) & FM & FM2 (good cameras albeit i missed the large viewfinder)......but the F remains something special.
Clearly though Pal K doesn't trouble himself with making decisions over which one to own....:p
 
Fjäll said:
It might be sample variation but the F sounded quieter. It looks even better too. Both had the plain prisms.
Click to expand...
The F is quieter. The brutalist look agrees with my eyes.
​​​​​​​
52312045511_d97bc3f6c9_k.jpg
 
I found an F2 with a photomic finder and a Nikkor P 105mm at a thrift store a few years ago. The F2 worked fine except for a noisy shutter. I later bought an F on craigslist mostlly for the plain finder, but it looked and worked like new. I ultimately gave the F2 to a friend. The F and the 105 are a great combo and the F shutter is one of the quietest I have. I like the meterless simplicity and reliability of the F.
 
Exactly Fjåll, so much of choosing a camera, a tool, a musical instrument has nothing to do with which is better. I first Nikon product was a Nikkormat FTn. I was a student with not much money.... but the big clang or of shutter and the serrated edge of the film advance lever didn't sit well with me.....within days i took if back and got a plain prism F. Like the Leica M3 or M2, there's just something quintessentially 'right' about the Nikon F
 
Like many here, I grew up with a Nikkormat FTn and loved it. It felt like an old friend picking up an Nikon S2 after several years with my M4-P and M6. Still to this day I kick myself when I gotinto Leicas there were many S2, SPs, and lenses languishing on shelves at several dealers in NYC. But back to your question.

While I currently have an F2 (plain prism) and have sold off all my Fs, I still love the feel of the F in my hand. If you can get over the removeable back vs swing open, not a lot of difference. Smoother curves, plastic advance lever (though very late Fs have one), same focusing screens, both are fine camera.

I'd pick the F just because of the feel in MY hand.

My recommendation is pick up the F and hunt for a good reasonably prices plain prism for your F2.

B2
 
I’ve had and used both the F and F2 cameras quite a lot, albeit all in the now distant past. Much as the F2 was technically superior, i have always preferred the F.

In fact, my last and only Nikon camera now is an early, plain prism F that i rescued from a friend's basement where it had languished, lens less, in an open box under s table for more than a decade. I had it serviced, and now have two remaining lenses for it (Nikkor 28/2 and Micro-Nikkor 55/3.5). Dont use it much but its my favorite Nikon.

G
 
Malcolm M said:
It has to be first choice camera for a sixties weekend.[/
Click to expand...

If any camera symbolized press photography in the 1960’s, it would have to be the Nikon with an FTN finder. Look at any photo from the 1960’s of a crowd of press photographers and I think fully half of them had FTN’s. So distinctive. Interestingly, the other photographers had a diverse mix of cameras - from someone holding a TLR above his head (upside down so as to see the viewing screen) to those with ciné cameras.
 
. I used this F in high school as a yearbook photographer, in college at Brooks Institute of Photography


Hey Cary...we were at Brooks around the same time, 1969-1971, me with a Canon FT...I switched to Nikon F in 1972.
I was a motion picture major...enjoyed the days at the Montecito campus. (altho Emile Dobro sure was a grouch ;-)
[/QUOTE]
 
I was at Brooks in 1976 and graduated in December 78'. Dobro was gone when I was there, but I heard several stories. I lived in Isla Vista and never had a problem finding models.
 
I loved the Nikon F I had in college and sometimes miss it.
If a nice one came my way at the right price I might bite.

However today I am happy to use Nikon F2 cameras, which are more serviceable today.

Chris
 
Pál_K said:
If any camera symbolized press photography in the 1960’s, it would have to be the Nikon with an FTN finder. Look at any photo from the 1960’s of a crowd of press photographers and I think fully half of them had FTN’s. So distinctive. Interestingly, the other photographers had a diverse mix of cameras - from someone holding a TLR above his head (upside down so as to see the viewing screen) to those with ciné cameras.
Click to expand...

So I'm not the only one who watches the photographers in old newsreels.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top