The Chinese are coming

[fredjeang2]

F4 had two grips available.  The smaller battery grip makes the F4 about the size of an F3.  The vertical grip of the F4s was heavy.  Steel and lots of batteries.  The F4 with the small grip is one of my favorite cameras ever made.  Not too heavy.  I still have the one I bought in 1990 or so when I went to work for UPI.  Its been in the shop twice in all those years.  It has the same prism as the F3HP.  I liked the F5 better but for the weight and size.  The AF on the F5 is the best AF system I've used, but it is a brick of a camera.

You might be one of those giant north american guys, with big hands and large shoulders, like the Hockey players. I'm about as tall (taller in fact) as Prince and the F4 felt completly unbalanced in my hands. Something I didn't feel with the digital MK1. I guess it has to do with ergonomics to each one body. Yes, there were the ones with the biggest grip. A nightmare. Also I remember that the metal pulished slided.

[BJL]

I am not sure what this has to do with medium format cameras and backs. It sounds like yet another very large, very expensive custom sensor for aerial and satellite photography, like ones that companies like Fairchild and Teledyne-Dalsa make. Do we know anything about the size of the sensor or its photosites?

Actually, scratch "expensive": so far it is just an attention-getting university press office blurb about a research prototype, so price is meaningless. Like the recent university PR puff piece suggesting that a new graphene sensor is 1000 times more sensitive than existing CMOS sensors, when in fact it is less sensitive.

P. S. Some 100MP+ Dalsa sensors actually available in products; up to 250MP:
http://www.aerial-survey-base.com/blog/zi-imaging-releases-digital-camera-system-dmc-ii-250/
http://www.intergraph.com/assets/pdf/coverage/GeoInformatics-5-2010-DMCII-page8-11.pdf
http://www.dcviews.com/press/dalsa-140.htm

[ondebanks]

F4 had two grips available.  The smaller battery grip makes the F4 about the size of an F3.  The vertical grip of the F4s was heavy.  Steel and lots of batteries.  The F4 with the small grip is one of my favorite cameras ever made.  Not too heavy.  I still have the one I bought in 1990 or so when I went to work for UPI.  Its been in the shop twice in all those years.  It has the same prism as the F3HP.  I liked the F5 better but for the weight and size. 

I've been toying with the idea of getting an F4/F4s sometime. I was just a kid when it came out, but I saw it in the photo magazines and thought it was the most gorgeous, capable and unaffordable camera I'd ever seen. Still do (gorgeous and capable, but no longer unaffordable). I am especially attracted by the controls - a dedicated dial or lever for everything - and the interchangeable viewfinders. It's not like I see myself shooting much 35mm film again...it would be more a camera to fondle and play with!

The AF on the F5 is the best AF system I've used, but it is a brick of a camera.

It's about 30% more brick-ish in its Kodak guises...like the DCS720x, and the DCS760 that bcooter was advocating. I have a DCS720x, the high-ISO, high-framerate "digital sports" version of the F5 with the unusual CMY Bayer array. I picked it up mainly for astrophotography where its sensitivity shone and the interchangeable viewfinder was great, but it disappointed me with a terrible degree of long exposure dark noise, so that was that. It's currently sitting in the "will get around to selling it sometime" cupboard! I also used it for some sports and indoor low-light events and found the AF impressive, but was not hugely keen on the electronic controls interface, which is why for film I'm more interested in the F4 than the F5.

As for the DCS760, BC makes it sound very appealing. I imagine that its images are quite like a 6MP crop of the 16.7MP DCS645M on my Mamiya, since both have 9 micron pixels (KAF-6302CE & KAF-16802CE CCDs respectively), 12 stops of DR and 12 bits of A/D, and the user interface and firmware are almost identical. The spectral response curves are somewhat different however.

Ray

[fredjeang2]

Try this experience:

Get a F4 and work a week with it

Then get a FM2, and work another
Week with it.

Then

Review your shoulders
Review the slides from each, the volume
Of pics taken, and the quality of
Those.

Report your findings.

[Rob C]

I worked extensively, over a lot of years with F, F2 Photomic, F4s and later an F3 when I'd concluded that the F4s was one mother of an embarrassement.

It was cursed with step-too-far self-loading (ironic joke) of film, which meant that I had to try to reload at least two or three times for each film. Imagine, in front of a model...

I only bought it because I thought that the F3 had been discontinued because of the lack of advertising - there seemed no logic to running the F3 and F4 versions together, so I guessed only the F4 was current at the time, but I was mistaken. It was the shortest Nikon relationship I ever had. I absolutely hated its weight and computer ethic.

That's a reason I'd have liked to have seen a straight, digi back for the F3: common-sense controls for focus, aperture and shutter speeds; manual and instinctive.

Rob C

[ondebanks]

Try this experience:

Get a F4 and work a week with it

Then get a FM2, and work another
Week with it.

Then

Review your shoulders
Review the slides from each, the volume
Of pics taken, and the quality of
Those.

Report your findings.

Fred: my most used walkabout setup is a Mamiya 645AFD, Kodak DCS645M digital back, and 55-110mm AF zoom lens.
So I seriously doubt that I'd find the F4 a strain on the shoulders 

Ray

[eronald]

I just wish they gave me a camera designed by the guy who invented the Minox. Now that was one of the most elegant designs ever -

Edmund

Hi,

the F3 is a wonderful/beautiful camera. Giorgio Giugiaro (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giorgetto_Giugiaro) designed it and I was a fan of his work. He also did the F4, F5, F6, ...

BTW, he also designed the DeLorean DMC-12 and many other wonderful cars for Alfa Romeo, Ferrari, Maserati, BMW, ...

Best,
Johannes

[Ajoy Roy]

They are developing an aerial camera and these have been there at high MP for quite some time. As mentioned Dalsa has 250MP chips in production.

I do not think that MFDB using these sensors will come soon as these cost around a million dollars each, well may be a Middle East Sheik will commission one.

[julienlanoo]

Knowing the chinees track record making wonderfull things into shit, i am extreamly optimist about this, ahum,...

Please to Tzee Germans and Swiss, make it again but then the then with the well known cultural style of perfection..

@ Stefan, lets hope the NSA picks this up abd takes action :p

[TMARK]

I worked extensively, over a lot of years with F, F2 Photomic, F4s and later an F3 when I'd concluded that the F4s was one mother of an embarrassement.

It was cursed with step-too-far self-loading (ironic joke) of film, which meant that I had to try to reload at least two or three times for each film. Imagine, in front of a model...

I only bought it because I thought that the F3 had been discontinued because of the lack of advertising - there seemed no logic to running the F3 and F4 versions together, so I guessed only the F4 was current at the time, but I was mistaken. It was the shortest Nikon relationship I ever had. I absolutely hated its weight and computer ethic.

That's a reason I'd have liked to have seen a straight, digi back for the F3: common-sense controls for focus, aperture and shutter speeds; manual and instinctive.

Rob C

My F4 had the bad loading issue.  They sent me a new one that was fixed.  Its been perfect since 1990.

[TMARK]

I carried an FM2 as backup in my PJ days.  I carried two F4s (one with the vertical grip, one without), the FM2, and an M6.  later I replaced an F4 with an F5.  And yes, I have back problems.  I kept weight down by not carrying too many lenses:  28AI-s, 50 1.4, 85 1.8, 20-35 zoom, 28-70 zoom, and 35 summicron.  Oh yeah, a Vivitar flash (later an SB28), 60 rolls of film, a Gossen meter.

In any case, the FM2 is awesome.  Bullet proof.  The finder is dim but acurate.  Light, unobtrusive.  I wish they had a digital version, it could replace a Leica for discrete.

Try this experience:

Get a F4 and work a week with it

Then get a FM2, and work another
Week with it.

Then

Review your shoulders
Review the slides from each, the volume
Of pics taken, and the quality of
Those.

Report your findings.

[fredjeang2]

True T,
The fm2 finder was dim, i remember that.

I think Nikon produced a version (was it the
Fe2 ?) Until very recently.
I guess because they had a high demand
From customers.
It tells a lot, a vintage camera that has been
Able to survive well entered the digital age.
Quite amazing.

The M is great but focussing is not easy. The
Other day a friend of mine adapted an olympus
Evf on it, horrible, unworkable in most cases.
Gadget like.
But files are gorgeous.

I think that the closest to the fm2 in digital
Could well be this Olympus om digital.
I think Coot has one in his arsenal.

[EricWHiss]

Stopping through... didn't see where the thread changed from new Chinese products to old Nikon film cameras, BUT ... I really like my F4 and 105 f/1.8 - the big finder makes the weight seem worth carrying. 

[TMARK]

The FE2 had "A" priority which was great.  I had one that my mother destroyed by dropping into a toilet in Malta.  

Nikon made an Fm3a up until recently.  Faster max shutter speed, better meter.  

The finder was dim but very accurate.  While modern DSLR screens are brighter, most have less magnification and make it almost impossible to see what is actually in focus with fast lenses.

Which brings me to my main, recurring rant:  why do Canon and Nikon make such bad finders in their whiz/bang digitals?  The ds3, d3x and 1dx have OK finders, but those cameras HUGE and expensive.  Canon should make a 5dIV with a big finder, with .78 or more magnification.  Nikon should make a D800 with a big finder. Rant over.

True T,
The fm2 finder was dim, i remember that.

I think Nikon produced a version (was it the
Fe2 ?) Until very recently.
I guess because they had a high demand
From customers.
It tells a lot, a vintage camera that has been
Able to survive well entered the digital age.
Quite amazing.

The M is great but focussing is not easy. The
Other day a friend of mine adapted an olympus
Evf on it, horrible, unworkable in most cases.
Gadget like.
But files are gorgeous.

I think that the closest to the fm2 in digital
Could well be this Olympus om digital.
I think Coot has one in his arsenal.

[bcooter]

I think that the closest to the fm2 in digital
Could well be this Olympus om digital.

I bought three 4/3's.  The OMD and gh3's for video.

The Gh3 are great, amazing at both motion and stills.

The OMD I love, it's like a film camera to me in the fact it's not too big, actually could be 1/8th larger to be perfect.

The files are great, kind of neg film like, really beautiful and pastel if you like, though don't really go above 1000, actually 800 is as high as they should go without issue.

The files aren't medium format detailed, or cmos dslr smooth, I think they're just pretty and have gotten use to the evf, actually like it.

With film I had omd2's, then Nikon's FM2's (great cameras - lasted forever) and f3, loved it  . . . sort of,  a N-90 great camera, an F5 amazing camera, an f4 I didn't like and dumped it in a few weeks.

I really hope olympus makes one more upscale version of the omd, rumor has they will, or they won't, but I love shooting with it, love the 4/3 crop and the olympus lenses are freaky good.

All they need to do is make their next version work well with their legacy 4:3 lenses like the 150 f2.  

This is mine with a panasonic Leica 25mm.




IMO

BC

[BJL]

Since we are veering from Chinese sensors for aerial photography (not MF) cameras to old MF Nikons to MFT:

The OMD I love, it's like a film camera to me in the fact it's not too big, actually could be 1/8th larger to be perfect.

Agreed: it would be perfect for me for the next body in the OMD line (and many mirrorless bodies) to be a bit bigger, for easier operation --- so long as they keep most of the lenses small. Basically, the opposite of the Sony NEX approach.

[ondebanks]

The FE2 had "A" priority which was great.  I had one that my mother destroyed by dropping into a toilet in Malta.  

That sounds like a story worth telling over a beer!

BTW you didn't say whether she did it on purpose? 

Ray

[Rob C]

I had an FM and then replaced it with an FM2 later - both only for the higher synch. speeds they allowed than did the F or F2.

I disliked both cameras, thinking then far lower quality than the F and F2 and yes, they were lighter, but tinny with it. The shutters sounded very second-class and I always felt that both cheap bodies produced less sharp images. I don't think the backs held the film as flat. As bad, the later version disallowed the use of all of my non-AI'd Nikkors, reducing the useability of my armoury to just a couple of lenses.

Had they not had that synch. advantage I wouldn't have dreamed of buying them, and that trick about lens compatability wasn't known until the purchase had been made and I'd returned to Spain, by which time it would have meant another trip to the UK just to dump the devil.

Shows you how snappers' ideas and shared experiences differ!

Rob C

[fredjeang2]

Very true Rob,
The shutter sounded very second-class,
I remember that it shocked me each time.
I hated the shutter sound of this camera.

[fredjeang2]

I bought three 4/3's.  The OMD and gh3's for video.

The Gh3 are great, amazing at both motion and stills.

The OMD I love, it's like a film camera to me in the fact it's not too big, actually could be 1/8th larger to be perfect.

The files are great, kind of neg film like, really beautiful and pastel if you like, though don't really go above 1000, actually 800 is as high as they should go without issue.

The files aren't medium format detailed, or cmos dslr smooth, I think they're just pretty and have gotten use to the evf, actually like it.

With film I had omd2's, then Nikon's FM2's (great cameras - lasted forever) and f3, loved it  . . . sort of,  a N-90 great camera, an F5 amazing camera, an f4 I didn't like and dumped it in a few weeks.

I really hope olympus makes one more upscale version of the omd, rumor has they will, or they won't, but I love shooting with it, love the 4/3 crop and the olympus lenses are freaky good.

All they need to do is make their next version work well with their legacy 4:3 lenses like the 150 f2.  

This is mine with a panasonic Leica 25mm.




IMO

BC

But when you talk about prety skintones,

Is it relatively right-out-the-box, or is it
That you had to dig into crazy settings
And run weeks of testings to
Finaly obtain the skintones ? (thinking for
Ex of the sony and magentas that is a
Pain in the ass to get it right)

It's intrresting to know your findings
With the Oly.