DK602
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 550
- Name
- Doug
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I doubt it (and I used one for a couple of years). It was a decent piece of kit but for my money not a patch on the F4. I found the F4's finder superior and the built in winder made the general handling much better. Still: everyone's got their own opinion on such things.Nikon F3HP - best SLR of all time?
I doubt it (and I used one for a couple of years). It was a decent piece of kit but for my money not a patch on the F4. I found the F4's finder superior and the built in winder made the general handling much better. Still: everyone's got their own opinion on such things.
I've not used the T90 so I don't know what the difference is. I found the F4's finder information good enough for my needs.It the F4 had the meter display in the view finder as the Canon T90 then it would indeed be a fantastic "all rounder" camera.
I don't think there's such a thing as 'The best SLR of all time'. There have been dozens of cameras with an enthusiastic following based on the different needs and desires of the owners.So I believe the Canon A1 is a much stronger contender for 'The best SLR of all time'.
I've not used the T90 so I don't know what the difference is. I found the F4's finder information good enough for my needs.
https://www.mir.SPAM/rb/photography/hardwares/nikonfinder/f4.htm
It's something of a mystery why the A1 seems to be somewhat overlooked these days, as it was a hugely important technological milestone camera that pretty much set the 'features' standard for modern SLRs; it was also reasonably affordable and, consequently, appealed to a much wider audience than something like a Nikon F3 or Canon F1n. So I believe the Canon A1 is a much stronger contender for 'The best SLR of all time'
I don't think there's such a thing as 'The best SLR of all time'. There have been dozens of cameras with an enthusiastic following based on the different needs and desires of the owners.
If you went on sales figures the Soviet Zenith E is quite probably the winner with an alleged 3,334,540 units made over 21 years. Canon's AE-1 is claimed to have sold in the region of 1,000,000 units during its production run so it's probably the 'most liked' of the "good" film SLRs. The classic "professional" SLR was the Nikon F with a claimed 862,600 units sold between 1959 and the introduction of the F2 in 1971.
Yes, but with varying degrees of functionality. So too can a lot of other models of Nikon SLR (and other camera makes too if a suitable adaptor is used). So I don't think that can really be counted as standard-setting innovation in 35mm SLR design?ermm but the F4 can use nearly any Nikon (and others for Nikon) manual focus lenses... as well as AF.
...and most of all the person who's making the claim. The choice is entirely personal and one person's opinion will definitely not meet with the approval of others.Like you, I doubt there can be a single 'greatest SLR of all time' as it depends on the era, the specification and the target market.
Unless the others happen to be members of the same team's fan club, and even then they are often divided in opinion as to the best player and/or piece of kit....and most of all the person who's making the claim. The choice is entirely personal and one person's opinion will definitely not meet with the approval of others.
Yes, but with varying degrees of functionality. So too can a lot of other models of Nikon SLR (and other camera makes too if a suitable adaptor is used). So I don't think that can really be counted as standard setting innovation in 35mm SLR design?
Or an A1 and an EOS 30, and those two are smaller and lighter, and work with full functionality with all their respective FD and EF lenses.Well Canon and Minolta? AF cameras can't take their own manual focus lenses...but Nikon cameras are not perfect in that they cannot use M42 screw lenses. But if you won't a perfect combo that covers nearly everything for filmies it would be to carry a F4 and Canon T90
Aaaaarrrggghhhh! The dreaded Pentina. I've handled about half a dozen of those and only one worked properly. Well: for half a film anyway...Well, if we're going for the more obscure approach...
I think you're the only person I've spoken to that's heard of one, let alone used one! This one still works, providing I tilt it backwards with the lens facing the sky when I wind on!Aaaaarrrggghhhh! The dreaded Pentina. I've handled about half a dozen of those and only one worked properly. Well: for half a film anyway...
The F3 wasn't around when NASA went to the moon but they did choose the F3 when it was released; infact it turns out NASA approached Nikon before it's release:
https://www.thephoblographer.com/2018/01/04/rare-nasa-nikon-f3-camera-24995/
For some reason I came across quite a few of them around 1970. Just lucky I guess.I think you're the only person I've spoken to that's heard of one, let alone used one!
Apparently fake news. The Wikipedia article claims 751,000 sold which puts it 111,600 units behind the original 'F' and 65,000 units behind the 'F2'.It is Nikon's best selling Pro SLR ever
In relation to other makes and more advanced cameras:
" While Olympus, Canon and Minolta were plowing ahead with “new” technology at the time, this camera screamed,…”No!”. No to program modes, no to autofocus, and no to idiot proofing. Not that Nikon wasn’t testing those waters with other Nikons. "
Snip:
Yet it still needed a battery to fire at anything other than 1/80th of a second (and presumably in full manual only?). Why not add some other electronic features in that case?
Playing devil's advocate; in hindsight, did the F3 mark the beginning of the end for Nikon's iron grip on the press camera market? Perhaps Canon's experimentation and innovation was the way to move on to produce cameras like the Canon EOS 1? They could do the rugged clockwork professional stuff (F1 & F1n) but rather than stick at that they saw the future?
I fully believe it was, as evidenced by the fact that they were the first to be able to introduce in-lens image stabilisation on a 35mm SLR (with the EF 75-300 IS lens). The foresight to include 7+ electronic contacts between the camera and lens provided a good degree of future proofing. Full functionality between just about every Canon EF lens and EOS SLR body (both 35mm and digital) ever made is no mean feat.Being a canon fan I think it was the choice to use a larger lens mount that won it for Canon - they were wise enough to realise autofocus was the next big thing so didn't worry about their Manual focus lenses where as Nikon stuck with their mount. This allowed the Canon cameras to excel where the Nikon lagged behind for a very long time.
At the time Canon were criticised but it was the best thing they did?
I doubt it (and I used one for a couple of years). It was a decent piece of kit but for my money not a patch on the F4. I found the F4's finder superior and the built in winder made the general handling much better. Still: everyone's got their own opinion on such things.
Isn't it usually putting classic 80s/90s Nikon cameras down that's the problem...I own an F3, an F3HP, and an F4S. I can't actually pick the F4 up, despite the fact that I'm as strong as three men, so I used it as a doorstop. Then I tripped over the bloody thing, and broke my toe.
In his book about collecting classic SLRs Ivor Matanle references the old calumny about the Nikon F with a FTn finder being "too great a burden for one man to bear alone". God alone knows what he thought of the F4E!Then I tripped over the bloody thing, and broke my toe.
Nikon F3HP - best SLR of all time?
ermm but the F4 can use nearly any Nikon (and others for Nikon) manual focus lenses... as well as AF. But would agree the Canon a1 was the start of a new age in it's day.
I never understood the love for the F3, personally. As an impoverished student, my 'dream' camera was a Nikon F4. I owned an FM2 and an F801s (a very underrated camera imo, if a bit 'lightweight' for professional use, but always gave me great results, and was exceptionally well featured). A couple of friends owned F3s. I wasn't enamoured with the handling, and why no hotshoe? Daft. And then the FM@ had a faster top shutter speed, and a much more useable top flash sync speed. And a hotshoe. And was smaller and lighter, yet just as tough. And was fully mechanical, and needed no battery. I don't remember F3s as being exceptionally reliable, in fact I knew at least a couple of professionals who preferred the F2, until newer cameras appeared. Surely the FA was what the F3 should have been? By comparison, the F4 has everything a photographer could want or need, and was exquisitely built, as well as having a hotshoe (no seriously; what was that all about?)!
I aim one day to have a full collection of pro F model cameras. So far I have just the F4 and F5 (the pinnacle of film SLR design?), but I hope to get the others soon. Plus a Canon F1. And a Pentax LX. And a Canon A1. And a Contax RTS3. And a Canon T90. And a Nikon FM3A. And a Hasselblad. And a Leica. And and and....