Been there, done that (twice in fact !), the last of my Nikon gear (F2,
F3/MD-4, FE2) is on *b*y at the moment, lenses going in a week or 2. I'd
agree that the F series is more solidly built than the OMs but useability is
not comparable. What do you do with the back of the F when you're changing
films in the field ? Put a metering prism on an F or F2 and see how easy it
is to rewind the film. Using camera mounted flash with an F, F2, F3 ? It's
great fun removing the flash & flash shoe adapter just to rewind the film !
Once you've tired of these things you might like to look at the Canon FD
gear (F1, F1n & F1N), also rock solid, I tired of that too. If I want to
impress with size and weight I've got the RB-67 !
> I really, really like the Olympus OM system. I'm a full-blown
> Zuikoholic fanatic - before I knew it, I had 3 bodies (including a
> 3Ti) and about 12 very cool lenses, including four cool Macro lenses,
> and f/2.0 from 21mm to 250mm. As far as 35mm photography is concerned,
> the OM system has allowed me to realise my vision. A happy camper, you
> could say.
> Then I went and did it. Just to experience the difference, I picked up
> an absolutely pristine Nikon F "Apollo" with plain, unmetered prism.
> It came with two first-generation (knurled metal focusing ring)
> lenses, a Nikkor-H.C 50/2.0, and a Nikkor-P 105/2.5. I really did not
> expect this camera to be so nice. It's bloody marvellous, in fact. I'm
> on my second roll of film now - going to develop both pretty soon.
> What do I really like?
> - The build quality is unmatched, period. It's a solid block of hand-
> made Japanese pride, from a bygone era. Remember, this is the camera
> that down-sized Leica.
> - The build quality... (oh, I said that already?) Man, this thing is
> nice. So are the OMs, but the Nikonf F is... a step above.
> - The lenses are more solid, and focus more smoothly, than my Olympus
> lenses (except the 250/2.0 which is impressively well-built I must
> admit). Seriously - these lenses are 50 years old, but they are in
> better operating condition - with no dust or dirt inside - than almost
> any of my Zuikos, all of which seem to gather some dust or flecks
> inside eventually (not that it matters to the image, but still...).
> The knurled metal focus rings are just so... right. I've had to fix up
> loose rubber focusing rings on *three* of my Zuikos. I can't focus a
> single one of my Zuikos.
> - I expected gunshot-like noise and vibration, but it's maybe 10%
> worse than my OM-3Ti. It's pretty smooth and quiet for 15-years older
> technology than the OMs.
> - The shutter just bloody works. My 3Ti is 15 years old, but it needs
> a service now, because the shutter speeds are all out. This thing is 4-
> + years old, and it's in *perfect* operating condition, seller claims
> it's never been serviced.
> - Amazingly bright as the 3Ti focus screen is, I find the F more
> accurate for focusing (I have three F screens to play with, trying out
> the different ones...). Werid, eh? It's much dimmer, but shows the
> real depth of field. Using DOF preview, you can actually *see* a
> difference between f/2.0 and f/2.8. The 3Ti screen is equally bright
> and crestal clear down to f/4, but perhaps induces focusing errors
> more easily? I don't know, further testing required...
> - "quiet mode" - just like a modern DSLR, I can shoot the F so that
> the mirror raises during exposure (relatively quiet), and lowers later
> when I am ready to wind the film (relatively loud). I love this.
> What don't I like?
> - The ergonomics (setting aperture and shutter speed) is no match for
> an OM camera. Like, not even close.
> - The darn lenses focus and [un]mount the wrong way round! Argh!
> - I am sure when I print my first rolls, the that Zuikos will be
> "better" than the 1950s-technology Nikkors
> - I hate the fact that all sorts of crazy exotic lenses are available
> for this system, as well as modern Zeiss lenses... ($$$)
> The thing that impresses me most, is the fact that this camera and the
> lenses are decades older than my (mostly 1980s) OM gear, but it works
> so much better. Everything is Leica-smooth. No, it's better (I have
> had to mess with my Leica M3 a lot, this thing *just works*) Even
> Leica lenses from the 1950s are usually filled with crap, and have
> their soft front elements scratched. You should see this 50/2.0 - has
> that deep, clean sheen of a brand new lens.
> Anyway, I'll keep you posted as to the results.
> -- "Serious zuikoholic tries older, chunkier system" --
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/