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 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 |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Same Old, Same Old
On 8/17/2009 5:36 PM uw_wayne spake thus:
On Aug 16, 4:21 pm, David Nebenzahl wrote: 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.) If you love what you have, continue to love it and use it. Screw what other people say! I'm trying to get an opinion on a camera I *don't* have (a Canon F-1), one I've actually never seen in the flesh. -- Found--the gene that causes belief in genetic determinism |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Same Old, Same Old
On Mon, 17 Aug 2009 18:42:03 -0700, David Nebenzahl wrote:
On 8/17/2009 5:36 PM uw_wayne spake thus: On Aug 16, 4:21 pm, David Nebenzahl wrote: 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.) If you love what you have, continue to love it and use it. Screw what other people say! I'm trying to get an opinion on a camera I *don't* have (a Canon F-1), one I've actually never seen in the flesh. Well, I can give you one, since I've actually used one. It was one of the "pro" systems available when I was looking to upgrade from my amateur/ freelance days to fulltime pro shooter. My other choices were the Olympus OM, Nikon, and Leica. I did a lot of investigating, including talking to camera repair techs in several major cities as to their opinions--from a durability and maintenance standpoint--of each system. By this time I had narrowed my choices to Nikon or Canon. (Leicas were too damned expensive, and the Olympus too damned small.) To a man, they said that Canon F-1s came in for repair about three times more frequently than Nikon F2s mostly for shutters or the reflex mirror drive. They said that the Canon's "drive train" just wasn't "beefy" enough to take the pounding of a motor drive. That, along with Nikon's lenses being slightly better, and the fact that Nikon had the best support for the pro in the world through the Nikon Professional Service, I chose the Nikon system. And I've been using them ever since--over 30 years. And I still have occasion to use my 30 year old AI Nikkors on my digital Nikons. Now, even with all that said, the Canon F-1 was not a bad camera, and the optics were excellent as was the overall system. I particularly liked the breech-type lens mount. Many pros used it with satisfaction, but I also know a few who switched to Nikons after using the F-1 for a few years, because they got fed up with them breaking too often. -- Fotoguy BestInClass.com "Personalized digital camera recommendations" http://www.bestinclass.com/digital-cameras |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|GG| Same Old, Same Old
uw_wayne wrote:
Hi. Very confident in what I say. Own Fm/motor, Fm2/motor drive(2), Fe/ motor drive, FM/motor drive,, F3/motor drive, F4(motor drive built in), D70, D80,Nikonos bodies(6) and 50+lenses! They are not doing justice to their earlier products! Six underwater film cameras? Why only consumer level D70, D80 models? What exactly are your complaints? -- Paul Furman www.edgehill.net www.baynatives.com all google groups messages filtered due to spam |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|GG| |GG| Same Old, Same Old
uw_wayne wrote:
On Aug 18, 4:38 pm, Paul Furman wrote: uw_wayne wrote: Hi. Very confident in what I say. Own Fm/motor, Fm2/motor drive(2), Fe/ motor drive, FM/motor drive,, F3/motor drive, F4(motor drive built in), D70, D80,Nikonos bodies(6) and 50+lenses! They are not doing justice to their earlier products! Six underwater film cameras? Why only consumer level D70, D80 models? What exactly are your complaints? -- Paul Furmanwww.edgehill.netwww.baynatives.com all google groups messages filtered due to spam Paul, my pro level film camers were, oh a grand to two maybe. O.K. I get inflation. But 8 grand for a Nikon 24 megpx for what Sony overcharges at 2.5 G's!. Give me a D90 Plastic body, the new software with a 26 megpx chip for the $300 it cost them and kick it up to 100% profit and charge me the $600 for the Xspeed + better chip. The cost of 1/2 a car is insane! Thats my only point. I once could buy an F6, or an old FE2 body, load Extar with an 85mm F1.4 and get the same qual;ity results. I just think it's time for fair value for the consumer and the manufacturers, thats all. I understand product development costs, but their pricing is unrealistic. D700 for $3k, you can't get a new car for $6k (twice that perhaps). It is true that Nikon pro gear is a bit slow in development and not the cheapest but they are a bit more cautious and the quality is top rate. Canon is a much larger company with vast resources and less emphasis on photographic gear. If you need 24MP, wait a couple years or get a Sony or Canon with Nikon adapter g. The Nikon D3s is a much better built camera than the Canon 5DII, the D300 better built than the comparable Canon. -- Paul Furman www.edgehill.net www.baynatives.com all google groups messages filtered due to spam |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|