If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Same Old, Same Old
uw wayne wrote:
I was a Nikon affianando for decades. But they continue to introduce products substandard in specs to many others, introduction after product introduction. But at ridulous prices. Will Nikon ever get their stuff together and lead again, instead of follow? Long after the competition has excelled them, they just copy! After 30 years of them it is wearing thin. NIKON, either lead or join Minolta. You may make a profit now, but your time is limited unless you compete in technology and price. Er, D3? D300? D700? D3x? Down the range a bit, some might consider the D90 is the best in its class. Or if you're talking 35mm film, the F6, still available new if you look, is probably the best 35mm film SLR ever made. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Same Old, Same Old
Alex Monro wrote,on my timestamp of 16/08/2009 9:05 PM:
Or if you're talking 35mm film, the F6, still available new if you look, is probably the best 35mm film SLR ever made. "probably"? more like "without a doubt"! |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Same Old, Same Old
On Sun, 16 Aug 2009 12:05:50 +0100, Alex Monro wrote:
uw wayne wrote: I was a Nikon affianando for decades. But they continue to introduce products substandard in specs to many others, introduction after product introduction. But at ridulous prices. Will Nikon ever get their stuff together and lead again, instead of follow? Long after the competition has excelled them, they just copy! After 30 years of them it is wearing thin. NIKON, either lead or join Minolta. You may make a profit now, but your time is limited unless you compete in technology and price. Er, D3? D300? D700? D3x? Down the range a bit, some might consider the D90 is the best in its class. Or if you're talking 35mm film, the F6, still available new if you look, is probably the best 35mm film SLR ever made. Just curious. Is that a subjective or objective opinion? And if the latter, what evaluative criteria did you use? I personally rate the Nikon F2 with the standard (non-meter) pentaprism as the best 35mm SLR ever produced based on its overall durability, longevity, and dependability as well as reviews, tests, opinions of other pros and camera repair techs, and shooting with it (and FMs & FM2s) professionally for over 20 years. I've yet to come across another camera--film or digital--that even comes close. The F2 was unique, synergistic, and today is considered by many in the auto-digital crowd an antique curiosity that should be in the Smithsonian. -- Fotoguy BestInClass.com "Personalized digital camera recommendations" http://www.bestinclass.com/digital-cameras |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Same Old, Same Old
Fotoguy wrote:
On Sun, 16 Aug 2009 12:05:50 +0100, Alex Monro wrote: uw wayne wrote: I was a Nikon affianando for decades. But they continue to introduce products substandard in specs to many others, introduction after product introduction. But at ridulous prices. Will Nikon ever get their stuff together and lead again, instead of follow? Long after the competition has excelled them, they just copy! After 30 years of them it is wearing thin. NIKON, either lead or join Minolta. You may make a profit now, but your time is limited unless you compete in technology and price. Er, D3? D300? D700? D3x? Down the range a bit, some might consider the D90 is the best in its class. Or if you're talking 35mm film, the F6, still available new if you look, is probably the best 35mm film SLR ever made. Just curious. Is that a subjective or objective opinion? And if the latter, what evaluative criteria did you use? I personally rate the Nikon F2 with the standard (non-meter) pentaprism as the best 35mm SLR ever produced based on its overall durability, longevity, and dependability as well as reviews, tests, opinions of other pros and camera repair techs, and shooting with it (and FMs & FM2s) professionally for over 20 years. I've yet to come across another camera--film or digital--that even comes close. The F2 was unique, synergistic, and today is considered by many in the auto-digital crowd an antique curiosity that should be in the Smithsonian. A camera is a tool. As such the F5, the EOS-1n/1v, Maxxum 9 are the absolute standouts in 35mm cameras. The F6 is a slightly watered down F5 but incorporates what is needed by a serious film shooter. Why then is the F5 better than the venerable F2? Because metering (etc.) are tools that the photographer needs. While the F2 might be legendary, that does not make it the best tool - elsewise nobody would have bought the F5 (etc.). One German studio had an F5 go somewhat over 1,000,000 shutter releases before going in for service (for other reasons). The studio is of course a benign environment, but that number is outstanding. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Same Old, Same Old
On Sun, 16 Aug 2009 15:49:59 -0400, Alan Browne wrote:
Fotoguy wrote: [snip] I personally rate the Nikon F2 with the standard (non-meter) pentaprism as the best 35mm SLR ever produced based on its overall durability, longevity, and dependability as well as reviews, tests, opinions of other pros and camera repair techs, and shooting with it (and FMs & FM2s) professionally for over 20 years. I've yet to come across another camera--film or digital--that even comes close. The F2 was unique, synergistic, and today is considered by many in the auto-digital crowd an antique curiosity that should be in the Smithsonian. A camera is a tool. As such the F5, the EOS-1n/1v, Maxxum 9 are the absolute standouts in 35mm cameras. The F6 is a slightly watered down F5 but incorporates what is needed by a serious film shooter. Why then is the F5 better than the venerable F2? Because metering (etc.) are tools that the photographer needs. While the F2 might be legendary, that does not make it the best tool - elsewise nobody would have bought the F5 (etc.). A tool is only as good as the tool user. You don't really need all the fancy features that today's electro-mechanical film (or digital) SLRs have to be a good photographer. You don't even need a light meter, built- in or hand-held, if you're a good photographer. I remember my second semester college photo course: No light meters permitted. You learned to "see" the proper exposure . . . eventually. If the only choice was the F5, there was no choice. Of course, there are always those whose decision is based solely on the brightness of an object, and consider little else. One German studio had an F5 go somewhat over 1,000,000 shutter releases before going in for service (for other reasons). The studio is of course a benign environment, but that number is outstanding. An exception, I'm sure, like those cars/trucks you see in ads with a million miles on the original, unoverhauled engine. I wonder how many F2s are out there that have as much mileage? We'll never know, since the camera, being all mechanical, is incapable of recording such statistics. Actually, in the mechanical camera days, the longevity of the shutter in cycles (or actuations as it's now called) was never advertised or even really considered (by the buyer). Off the top of my head, my guess, is the F2 shutter was good for 500,000 cycles, typical, with the FMs or FM2s good for half that. It took me about 12 years of fairly serious shooting with motor drives to wear out the shutters on two of my FMs. So, that's in the ballpark. -- Fotoguy BestInClass.com "Personalized digital camera recommendations" http://www.bestinclass.com/digital-cameras |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Same Old, Same Old
Fotoguy wrote:
On Sun, 16 Aug 2009 15:49:59 -0400, Alan Browne wrote: Fotoguy wrote: [snip] I personally rate the Nikon F2 with the standard (non-meter) pentaprism as the best 35mm SLR ever produced based on its overall durability, longevity, and dependability as well as reviews, tests, opinions of other pros and camera repair techs, and shooting with it (and FMs & FM2s) professionally for over 20 years. I've yet to come across another camera--film or digital--that even comes close. The F2 was unique, synergistic, and today is considered by many in the auto-digital crowd an antique curiosity that should be in the Smithsonian. A camera is a tool. As such the F5, the EOS-1n/1v, Maxxum 9 are the absolute standouts in 35mm cameras. The F6 is a slightly watered down F5 but incorporates what is needed by a serious film shooter. Why then is the F5 better than the venerable F2? Because metering (etc.) are tools that the photographer needs. While the F2 might be legendary, that does not make it the best tool - elsewise nobody would have bought the F5 (etc.). A tool is only as good as the tool user. You don't really need all the fancy features that today's electro-mechanical film (or digital) SLRs have to be a good photographer. You don't even need a light meter, built- in or hand-held, if you're a good photographer. I remember my second semester college photo course: No light meters permitted. You learned to "see" the proper exposure . . . eventually. In limited cases I do that. (Recent pano for example). However, for most photography the lack of a meter and relying on experience would be somewhat error prone. Further while negative and B&W film allows you more latitute (esp. if you err to the high side), slide film simply does not give you that luxury. Digital is likewise prone to blow out in a manner similar to slide. If the only choice was the F5, there was no choice. If the F2,3,4 satisfied, the F5 would not have sold. Pros however upgrade gear at a fast rate. A legendary F2 that lasts forever somehow gets replaced as there is a need. Of course, there are always those whose decision is based solely on the brightness of an object, and consider little else. One German studio had an F5 go somewhat over 1,000,000 shutter releases before going in for service (for other reasons). The studio is of course a benign environment, but that number is outstanding. An exception, I'm sure, like those cars/trucks you see in ads with a million miles on the original, unoverhauled engine. Far end of the bathtub, but Nikon's rep for reliability is not for nothing. Emerging design for manufacturing was sweetening at about the time that the F5 came on the scene. I wonder how many F2s are out there that have as much mileage? We'll never know, since the camera, being all mechanical, is incapable of recording such statistics. Actually, in the mechanical camera days, the longevity of the shutter in cycles (or actuations as it's now called) was never advertised or even really considered (by the buyer). Off the top of my head, my guess, is the F2 shutter was good for 500,000 cycles, typical, with the FMs or FM2s good for half that. It took me about 12 years of fairly serious shooting with motor drives to wear out the shutters on two of my FMs. So, that's in the ballpark. A single point statistic. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Same Old, Same Old
On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 19:35:20 -0400, Alan Browne wrote:
Fotoguy wrote: A camera is a tool. As such the F5, the EOS-1n/1v, Maxxum 9 are the absolute standouts in 35mm cameras. The F6 is a slightly watered down F5 but incorporates what is needed by a serious film shooter. Why then is the F5 better than the venerable F2? Because metering (etc.) are tools that the photographer needs. While the F2 might be legendary, that does not make it the best tool - elsewise nobody would have bought the F5 (etc.). A tool is only as good as the tool user. You don't really need all the fancy features that today's electro-mechanical film (or digital) SLRs have to be a good photographer. You don't even need a light meter, built- in or hand-held, if you're a good photographer. I remember my second semester college photo course: No light meters permitted. You learned to "see" the proper exposure . . . eventually. In limited cases I do that. (Recent pano for example). However, for most photography the lack of a meter and relying on experience would be somewhat error prone. Further while negative and B&W film allows you more latitute (esp. if you err to the high side), slide film simply does not give you that luxury. Digital is likewise prone to blow out in a manner similar to slide. Don't misunderstand. I'm not saying not to use a light meter. It is an essential tool, especially if you're getting paid to take pictures. But you should know its proper use, its flaws and failings, and not to trust its readings as gospel all the time for many times the "correct" exposure is not always the "best" exposure. If the only choice was the F5, there was no choice. If the F2,3,4 satisfied, the F5 would not have sold. Pros however Wrong. Coming out with "new and improved" models is the best way to improve one's market share and increase profitability in an a highly competitive market with falling profit margins. (Decreasing product quality is another way.) And there are always enough buyers who will buy the new model just so they have the latest model even though there is nothing wrong will the old model other than it's not "new." upgrade gear at a fast rate. A legendary F2 that lasts forever somehow gets replaced as there is a need. Yes, when it breaks and can't be repaired, or when it no longer fulfills one's needs, or when with some people it's replaced by a new model. I remember when cameras got handed down from father to son (or daughter), etc. Not so much today: Cameras don't seem to last long enough; and offspring seem only to cherish that which is new _and_ cool. ;-) I wonder how many F2s are out there that have as much mileage? We'll never know, since the camera, being all mechanical, is incapable of recording such statistics. Actually, in the mechanical camera days, the longevity of the shutter in cycles (or actuations as it's now called) was never advertised or even really considered (by the buyer). Off the top of my head, my guess, is the F2 shutter was good for 500,000 cycles, typical, with the FMs or FM2s good for half that. It took me about 12 years of fairly serious shooting with motor drives to wear out the shutters on two of my FMs. So, that's in the ballpark. A single point statistic. Actually two data points. The shutters failed in two FMs within a couple weeks of one another. Quite a testament to modern failure analysis. -- Fotoguy BestInClass.com "Personalized digital camera recommendations" http://www.bestinclass.com/digital-cameras |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Same Old, Same Old
On 8/16/2009 4:05 AM Alex Monro spake thus:
Or if you're talking 35mm film, the F6, still available new if you look, is probably the best 35mm film SLR ever made. Not looking to start a "brand war", but how would you stack up the top-o'-line Canons (F-1) against it? (I have an A-1 which I really like, but wouldn't try to claim as the best SLR ever made.) -- Found--the gene that causes belief in genetic determinism |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|