Nikon F6

joxby said:
hmm.....its a theory Brian but if you can say that about an F6, if that's all its about, why go to the extraordinary extravagance of a T90, surely if you can't take decent shots with a PAS that does everything for you, what difference will a T90 make with all that proper glass in the lens and fancy AF..:)
Click to expand...

Well think of the achievement with a great shot (that would win a prize) and someone said "what camera did you use" and you said "a MTL3 I bought for £4" ;) But of course a T90, F100 etc etc can do more than a MTL3 so gives you more opportunity to use what skill you have\might have...but basically a camera is a light tight box separating the lens from the photographer....anyway John you know all this but there might be some who haven't thought of it in this way.
 
StephenM said:
Some name like that anyway. It's the go-faster red stripe that makes it distinctive...
Click to expand...

giugiaro that's the chap! Him of the Morris marina ital.... Oh well, the thought was there!
 
Last edited:
excalibur2 said:
Well think of the achievement with a great shot (that would win a prize) and someone said "what camera did you use" and you said "a MTL3 I bought for £4" ;) But of course a T90, F100 etc etc can do more than a MTL3 so gives you more opportunity to use what skill you have\might have...but basically a camera is a light tight box separating the lens from the photographer....anyway John you know all this but there might be some who haven't thought of it in this way.
Click to expand...

I don't think it should ever be about "the gear". For me, it's more about what you want to do.
 
Yep it's about the whole journey to the end product and has become gear centric jewellery. For me the tools should not get in the way or compromise the artistic intent. I find it fascinating as a new member that the most frequented forum is the the equipment one! Stick with the camera and gear you enjoy using, sell the stuff you don't.

Camera, drive, finder, lens, film, development, scanning et al are artistic decisions as much as the exposure triangle or composition. What I see over and over again is people seeing a fab picture and wanting to to know the equipment/get the equipment in the vain hope they can get the same.The hardware industry feeds on that image jealousy when people would be better off spending that money on getting a pro model, styling, travel or a short course or whatever.

I see people with lots of gear but bored with what they can shoot - use the money more wisely.
 
Last edited:
adrianday said:
I don't think it should ever be about "the gear". For me, it's more about what you want to do.
Click to expand...

Well yes and achievement as I think a guy who produced a great shot from a Kodak brownie or pinhole camera is worth a pat on the back.
 
Yep the Bailey's, Donovan's, licchfield's, newton's et al all did awesome work with much less than we have now as did the generation before them. Think we are without excuses! Substitute GAS for Image Aquisition Syndrome and we'd all be better off. The first step to addressing the GAS addiction is to stop reading Amater Photographer that yet again is devoting page after page to the mirror less campaign trail. You'd think Fuji and Sony are bankrolling them.... Compare to this more independent article http://petapixel.com/2016/04/04/sonys-full-frame-pro-mirrorless-fatal-mistake/. Put down the mags, stop posting in the gear forum load one camera and one lens and go and create art!
 
Ian in Lancs said:
use the money more wisely.
Click to expand...

Indeed most of my 35mm cameras I bought for under £15 and quite a few for under a fiver...might seem daft having so many 35mm cameras as I'm not a collector for display, but I'm interested in playing with lenses and know when I get a bargain at the bootie or on the bay know I have a camera to fit.o_O
 
chuckles said:
But where else will get a shiny clean 'sensor' every shot? And every function you could ever imagine?
Click to expand...
Unfortunately that shiny clean sensor does't stay clean and shiny for long, a recent return to film reminded me of all the problems I had with dust on negatives and needing to spot prints
prompted me to put away my rose tinted spectacles and stick with digital.
 
for me, buying the Nikon F6 is in much the same (albeit even more expensive) category as buying a Canon EOS 1v - i.e. it's a chance to have the "last in the line" - possibly the "best" 35mm camera that one of the top manufacturers knew how to make, just as they were turning over to digital.

Of course, it really only makes sense if you're invested in the Full-Frame Auto Focus Lens Eco-system - taking the Canon point of view, if you've a full frame Digital Canon body, and a bagful of L lenses, and you occasionally enjoy shooting on film - or - strange as it may seem, get asked to do so by some wierd clients (yep, I do actually get that occasionally - usually hipster tosspot Bands, but WTF, they're paying a premium for it...) then having a film body that works pretty much interchangeably with the digital body is brilliant - and at s/h Canon EOS 1v prices it's almost a no-brainer (only reason I haven'd got one is that I've already got a EOS-3 which is probably 95% the same functional camera, just without the Magnesium Alloy Body...) The AF performance of the EOS-3 and 1v is pretty amazing - basically, the same AF sensors went into the top of the range EOS 1D's and was pretty much the same 45 point area AF with minor tweaks right through to the 1Diii in 2007 and beyond - albeit with faster processors improving the overall AF speed...

The F6 and EOS-1v bodies don't make sense with manual focus lenses, but that's missing the point of these bodies. They're the last gasp of 35mm Pro Film Bodies, meant to be paired with pro-level AF lenses. It really doesn't matter if they won't give of their best when paired with a £2 Russian 50mm screwmount lens from a car-boot sale - because they're not about that. Similary, it doesn't matter that the EOS-1v won't work well with canon's own FD lenses - it wasn't designed to, if you wan't "state of the art automation" from the body with the FD lenses, buy a Tank (T90) - or, if you want a more tactile experience, get a A1 or F1... or any number of the older types...

So - I know I've banged on about Canon here - but I know the Canon side of things, and while I've never spent much time shooting with Nikon, I appreciate that they're the other side of the coin to Canon - and the rivalry between the two companies was what drove the advances in technology along - so, I'm pretty happy to say that the F6, being the last ever pro-quality body to be in production, is definitely going to be the most advanced way of shooting 35mm film stills - and all of the observations of it only really making sense when paired with full-frame, pro-quality lenses from Nikon's top shelf kit are going to be equally true as they are with the EOS-1v.

For many, the fact that it feels pretty interchangeable shooting with the "last in line" film bodies or a modern Digital body takes something away from the "film experience" - and I can appreciate that - there ARE times when I want to have a "bare metal" interface - just me, a manual camera, manual lens, hell - manual shutter wind and release if it comes to it... Dammit, I even shoot with pinhole Holga's occasionally - can't get much less automated or unsophisticated than that. But equally, there are times when I want the result on film, and I have to get the result, and, for those times, I'll admit it - my faith in my own perfection wavers, and I reach for the EOS-3 and the L glass... I know, for example, when I bought my last roll of Kodachrome - there was only one camera that roll was going in - I wanted all 36 frames properly exposed - ok, the subject matter may have been crap, that's down to me - but the technical exposure of the shots was bang on the money 36/36. And I knew it would be, because, in the past, I'd spent a short time working as ships photographer on a couple of cruise liners, shooting upwards of 15 rolls of 36x per night, in "mixed lighting" dining rooms, and over the space of 2 months I basically lost 3 frames from technical failures (each time I missed the battery warning light !)
 
This becoming dangerously close to a film vs digital thread and we don't want that to happen do we?
 
TheBigYin said:
for me, buying the Nikon F6 is in much the same (albeit even more expensive) category as buying a Canon EOS 1v - i.e. it's a chance to have the "last in the line" - possibly the "best" 35mm camera that one of the top manufacturers knew how to make, just as they were turning over to digital.

Of course, it really only makes sense if you're invested in the Full-Frame Auto Focus Lens Eco-system - taking the Canon point of view, if you've a full frame Digital Canon body, and a bagful of L lenses, and you occasionally enjoy shooting on film - or - strange as it may seem, get asked to do so by some wierd clients (yep, I do actually get that occasionally - usually hipster tosspot Bands, but WTF, they're paying a premium for it...) then having a film body that works pretty much interchangeably with the digital body is brilliant - and at s/h Canon EOS 1v prices it's almost a no-brainer (only reason I haven'd got one is that I've already got a EOS-3 which is probably 95% the same functional camera, just without the Magnesium Alloy Body...) The AF performance of the EOS-3 and 1v is pretty amazing - basically, the same AF sensors went into the top of the range EOS 1D's and was pretty much the same 45 point area AF with minor tweaks right through to the 1Diii in 2007 and beyond - albeit with faster processors improving the overall AF speed...

The F6 and EOS-1v bodies don't make sense with manual focus lenses, but that's missing the point of these bodies. They're the last gasp of 35mm Pro Film Bodies, meant to be paired with pro-level AF lenses. It really doesn't matter if they won't give of their best when paired with a £2 Russian 50mm screwmount lens from a car-boot sale - because they're not about that. Similary, it doesn't matter that the EOS-1v won't work well with canon's own FD lenses - it wasn't designed to, if you wan't "state of the art automation" from the body with the FD lenses, buy a Tank (T90) - or, if you want a more tactile experience, get a A1 or F1... or any number of the older types...

So - I know I've banged on about Canon here - but I know the Canon side of things, and while I've never spent much time shooting with Nikon, I appreciate that they're the other side of the coin to Canon - and the rivalry between the two companies was what drove the advances in technology along - so, I'm pretty happy to say that the F6, being the last ever pro-quality body to be in production, is definitely going to be the most advanced way of shooting 35mm film stills - and all of the observations of it only really making sense when paired with full-frame, pro-quality lenses from Nikon's top shelf kit are going to be equally true as they are with the EOS-1v.

For many, the fact that it feels pretty interchangeable shooting with the "last in line" film bodies or a modern Digital body takes something away from the "film experience" - and I can appreciate that - there ARE times when I want to have a "bare metal" interface - just me, a manual camera, manual lens, hell - manual shutter wind and release if it comes to it... Dammit, I even shoot with pinhole Holga's occasionally - can't get much less automated or unsophisticated than that. But equally, there are times when I want the result on film, and I have to get the result, and, for those times, I'll admit it - my faith in my own perfection wavers, and I reach for the EOS-3 and the L glass... I know, for example, when I bought my last roll of Kodachrome - there was only one camera that roll was going in - I wanted all 36 frames properly exposed - ok, the subject matter may have been crap, that's down to me - but the technical exposure of the shots was bang on the money 36/36. And I knew it would be, because, in the past, I'd spent a short time working as ships photographer on a couple of cruise liners, shooting upwards of 15 rolls of 36x per night, in "mixed lighting" dining rooms, and over the space of 2 months I basically lost 3 frames from technical failures (each time I missed the battery warning light !)
Click to expand...
^^^He talks a lot of sense ^^^
 
The way I see it is, if you are genuinely going to use it, and you have a discrete use for it that no other camera you have quite scratches the itch for, then go for it. Indeed, as has been said before now, the F5 is an utterly stunning camera, much much cheaper, and worthy of consideration. I'd say that if you just want to own an F6, then don't waste your money.

I do understand how you feel though, I really wish I'd never sold my F5, or my FM3a. But the issue is, I never used them and I don't need them, so until I have the money to burn and have them as nice things to look at, I'll just have to do without.

RaglanSurf said:
This becoming dangerously close to a film vs digital thread and we don't want that to happen do we?
Click to expand...

It's ok, we all know film is better...:exit:
 
old bloke said:
Unfortunately that shiny clean sensor does't stay clean and shiny for long, a recent return to film reminded me of all the problems I had with dust on negatives and needing to spot prints
prompted me to put away my rose tinted spectacles and stick with digital.
Click to expand...

So you could get spots on the picture from a dirty sensor and you could get spots on a film picture..So what's next? :rolleyes:
 
Right, now we've concluded that film is better and film cameras are a tactile experience let's talk about automatic watches vs digital watches
 
Last edited:
excalibur2 said:
Canon EOS1v vs F6 sounds interesting ;)
Click to expand...

not an easy comparison to make though, unless you've around 5-6K of lenses in comparable focal lengths/f-stops of both makes kicking around - which is why I couldn't really say anything about the Nikon - I just don't have the lens systems - but if I'd gone for Nikon instead of Canon 15 years ago, when I started accumulating those AF lenses with the red rings around the end, I think I'd probably have a F6 body in the camera cabinet, ready to do the same duty my EOS-3 does now...

I'm not into the whole "holy war" type of thing - they're both bloody good makes, with excellent lenses (and a couple of duff ones each just for balance) and they were both professional systems made for people to earn a living with... both of them are more than capable - which one is best simply depends on what glass you've already got to strap on the front of them...

For Me, changing from Canon to Nikon wouldn't simply be the cost of aquiring a F6 - it'd be replacing the 17-40L, the 28-105L , the 75-200F2.8IS, the 85 1.2L, the 50mm 1.4 and a few others - along with also swapping out the 5Dii, the 7D for the Nikon Equivalents... Not cheap.
 
Last edited:
Then you end up just testing/comparing lenses. I am fortunate enough to have the f2.8 Nikon trinity 14-24, 24-28 and 70-200 plus 24, 35, 50, 60M 85, 105M, 135 DC so that locks me to Nikon and I can exploit the f6 to the full. Plenty of chums have canon or Nikon kits and there is nothing to separate the brands.
 
Last edited:
..but taking into consideration the whole hobby of photography from pictures to lenses the Canon would be more versatile in that it can take M42 and old nikon lenses...so my choice would be EOS1
 
Ian in Lancs said:
Then you end up just testing/comparing lenses. I am fortunate enough to have the f2.8 Nikon trinity 14-24, 24-28 and 70-200 plus 24, 35, 50, 60M 85, 105M, 135 DC so that locks me to Nikon and I can exploit the f6 to the full. Plenty of chums have canon or Nikon kits and threre is nothing to separate the brands.
Click to expand...

There is a popular site and all they mainly do is compare lenses or test any old lenses inc cine and even projector lenses to see the results...h'mm well a plus for digi cameras as they sometime use tape to hold the lens in place (see pic below). Reminds me of an old Heath Robinson type guy I used to know, who would make up a tele lens from an old telescope ....it was his hobby and enjoyed it, but I think it was because he didn't have any money to buy one in the early 1960s.

H'mm now how do I use this lens on my film camera :D

 
old bloke said:
There is no next Brian I was simply responding to Barry's post.
Click to expand...

......well Bob I was just wondering what side of the fence you were on ;)...but it doesn't matter as plenty of guys here use good digi equipment as well as film and probably 99.9% use a digi even if it's a quick shot from a mobile. So we know all the arguments for digi vs film.
 
excalibur2 said:
......well Bob I was just wondering what side of the fence you were on ;)...but it doesn't matter as plenty of guys here use good digi equipment as well as film and probably 99.9% use a digi even if it's a quick shot from a mobile. So we know all the arguments for digi vs film.
Click to expand...
I was a very happy film user for more years than I care to remember I got my first camera when I was eleven and processed my first film less than a week later that was in 1956 , first digital was I think in 2005, I tried to return to film last year and I had a good go at it
but my god I found it hard work so I sold all the film gear and returned to digital exclusively, as you say it doesn't matter as long as you enjoy what you are doing.
 
old bloke said:
I was a very happy film user for more years than I care to remember I got my first camera when I was eleven and processed my first film less than a week later that was in 1956 , first digital was I think in 2005, I tried to return to film last year and I had a good go at it
but my god I found it hard work so I sold all the film gear and returned to digital exclusively, as you say it doesn't matter as long as you enjoy what you are doing.
Click to expand...

You are probably the same age as me and I must have used a box Brownie to photograph my parents in the late 40s (yanno passed the camera over and all you have to do just slide the shutter lever), but definitely had my own camera at least in 1950-1953 as I still have the shots I took...but never left film and haven't spent a penny on digi as the half working Canon Ixus I use for quick shots was given to me.
Anyone who is a filmie and would like a job abroad can always apply here, sorry no digi guys o_O https://cameraventures.com/jobs
 
Last edited:
Apologies in advance if I am generating unnecessary temptation folks, but I notice Ffordes have an F6 in their sale section for £499. It looks like it has a few marks on the body but they're probably trivial, and I'm sure this one was previously £599 or maybe more when I looked last time. Anyway, don't think I've ever seen one at this price before from a dealer:

http://www.ffordes.com/product/14061212181731
 
bargain!
 
Ian in Lancs said:
Yep it's about the whole journey to the end product and has become gear centric jewellery. For me the tools should not get in the way or compromise the artistic intent. I find it fascinating as a new member that the most frequented forum is the the equipment one! Stick with the camera and gear you enjoy using, sell the stuff you don't.

Camera, drive, finder, lens, film, development, scanning et al are artistic decisions as much as the exposure triangle or composition. What I see over and over again is people seeing a fab picture and wanting to to know the equipment/get the equipment in the vain hope they can get the same.The hardware industry feeds on that image jealousy when people would be better off spending that money on getting a pro model, styling, travel or a short course or whatever.
I see people with lots of gear but bored with what they can shoot - use the money more wisely.
Click to expand...

Absolutely! All the gear and no idea ... is how I used to describe the syndrome. The picture is the thing, always, always. Can you see it? Can you get it? Can you bite someone with it? Will you do whatever it takes to get to where the pictures are hiding (and realise so when you're there)? Those are the kind of questions which drive someone's photography forward I'd say. For sure, some kit will help you get those pictures you want more readily and consistently than other kit but, frankly, unless you can see and act like a photographer, nothing in your kitbag will help you bring anything arresting back from where you've been.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top