Digital Nikon FM2 on his way

[BJL]

I just want to point out, the VF on the F3 (at least the HP version which I have) is not that big, about the same as the D800.  For a big VF, think the Olympus OM-1.

The regular F3 was slightly better with 0.8x magnification compared to the 0.75x of the "high eye-point" HP version, but for VF magnification, even the humble Pentax K-1000 did better at 0.88x (but less coverage percentage). And the Olympus OM-1 was 0.92x; probably a record in 35mm format.

It seems that the combined shift to higher eye-points (to accommodate spectacle wearers?) and displaying more information around the image in the VF drove VF image sizes down, and then AF pushed them down even more.

[TMARK]

BUT, the K1000 wasn't as bright as the F3hp, as I recall through the haze of memory from 1987.

The regular F3 was slightly better with 0.8x magnification compared to the 0.75x of the "high eye-point" HP version, but for VF magnification, even the humble Pentax K-1000 did better at 0.88x (but less coverage percentage). And the Olympus OM-1 was 0.92x; probably a record in 35mm format.

It seems that the combined shift to higher eye-points (to accommodate spectacle wearers?) and displaying more information around the image in the VF drove VF image sizes down, and then AF pushed them down even more.

[bcooter]

BUT, the K1000 wasn't as bright as the F3hp, as I recall through the haze of memory from 1987.

T I know you like an optical finder, but give yourself a chance to wrap your head around the Olympus em-1 finder.  Actually those 43 lenses feel just like little leicas and there are so many ways to hit accurate focus it's crazy and with proper processing (in c1, or the olympus software or the very best iridient raw developer) you'll get an image so close to your m9 you'll be amazed.


BC

[BJL]

BUT, the K1000 wasn't as bright as the F3hp, as I recall through the haze of memory from 1987.

No dispute there; I only mentioned the K1000 as an example of a far cheaper and less prestigious camera with distinctly higher VF mag. than the F3HP which had if anything lowish VF magnification compared to its contemporaries, in exchange for its high eye-point.

But more to the point, there is a natural trade-off between VF brightness and VF image size (when using comparable lenses, like 50/1.8 in each case): the same light from lens is being spread over a larger region.  So it is not surprising that the 0.75x VF of the F3HP is brighter than the 0.88x of the K1000.  In fact I suspect that this, combined with the increasing usage zoom lenses that generally deliver a less bright image than primes start with [going with a trend to faster films?], was one factor in the trend to lower VF magnification.  My student kit of K1000 with f/3.5-5.6 zoom was not great for VF brightness!

[Deardorff]

Tried three of the Oympus with the electronic finders. Too jumpy and a real pain to use because of it. Also, the bright view spotlights you in the darkness and ruins your night vision. Just when you need it for stars and auroras..., you lose your vision.

[TMARK]

I will check it out next time I'm in NYC or LA.

T I know you like an optical finder, but give yourself a chance to wrap your head around the Olympus em-1 finder.  Actually those 43 lenses feel just like little leicas and there are so many ways to hit accurate focus it's crazy and with proper processing (in c1, or the olympus software or the very best iridient raw developer) you'll get an image so close to your m9 you'll be amazed.


BC

[Telecaster]

Tried three of the Oympus with the electronic finders. Too jumpy and a real pain to use because of it. Also, the bright view spotlights you in the darkness and ruins your night vision. Just when you need it for stars and auroras..., you lose your vision.

The new E-M1 tones down the EVF brightness in low light...it is a problem with earlier cameras. The E-M5 and E-M1 EVFs refresh at a faster rate than earlier versions too.

BTW, here's a cool way to look at the Moon with any camera equipped with Live View. An articulated rear screen helps as does manual aperture control. Mount a long lens on the camera--I use a Nikon 400mm + 2x TC on my m43 cameras--and then focus on the Moon. Set the aperture for a pleasant view on the LCD. Now aim just in front of where the Moon will soon be, set the LCD magnification to a high value & let the Moon glide into view. With enough magnification you'll feel like Neil Armstrong flying the Apollo 11 lander across the lunar landscape towards Tranquility Base.

-Dave-

[simonstucki]

actually I sold my om-2 because the viewfinder was too big for me, meaning I didn't have a satisfying view of the whole image. I still have my f3hp... that size is the optimum for me I think

[BernardLanguillier]

The 5th video was released.

Besides the retro controls, it seems that Nikon has put a major focus on build quality.

Cheers,
Bernard

[Deardorff]

Was out last night with a friend and we were checking night sky for auroras before the clouds moved in.

His electronic eye level finder camera was bright and very distracting. Shined back out the eyepiece. Looking into it was an experience in night blindness for the next 10 minutes.

Much prefer my optical finder without all the bright lights showing up.

Add in having to tape over all the blinking lights on the outside of some of the electronic marvels so they aren't so distracting...

I know many like the screen viewing on the back of the cameras but I can't deal with them in dark settings without losing night vision for awhile. Enough so it ruins it for me much of the time.

[hjulenissen]

[quote author=Deardorff link=topic=83306.msg676025#msg676025 date=1383313247
I know many like the screen viewing on the back of the cameras but I can't deal with them in dark settings without losing night vision for awhile. Enough so it ruins it for me much of the time.
[/quote]
Surely it must be possible to reduce brightness through a menu setting, or secure a piece of ND glass to the viewfinder?

Having a software option of automatically adjusting EVF brightness in accordance with scene brightness (using e.g. exposure parameters/light metering) would seem like a sensible option for cases such as yours.

-h

[BJL]

Perhaps this thread should be moved (and retitled!): the latest images of the Nikon Df at http://nikonrumors.com/2013/11/04/this-is-the-nikon-df.aspx/#more-66660 make it clear that it is hardly a "digital FM2" and very far from being a compact system camera. Instead, externally it just adds half a dozen single-function mechanical dials in place of one of the two multi-purpose electronically-coupled dials, and keeps the mode dial down to four positions (MASP) instead of five (MASPV) by disabling the video capabilities that its sensor and processing chips certainly have.

EDIT: Maybe it does not lose the second "soft dial"; that unmarked round knurled thing on the front below the shutter release might be that. If so, the Df just adds half a dozen old-school mechanical control knobs as alternatives along-side the standard modern controls.
Plus a small top-panel LCD to display info that the old-school dials cannot, like 1/3rd step shutter speed choices.

[TMARK]

Pics are up.  Looks good in black.  A bit busy what with all those dials. 

[AFairley]

Perhaps this thread should be moved (and retitled!): the latest images of the Nikon Df at http://nikonrumors.com/2013/11/04/this-is-the-nikon-df.aspx/#more-66660 make it clear that it is hardly a "digital FM2" and very far from being a compact system camera. Instead, externally it just adds half a dozen single-function mechanical dials in place of one of the two multi-purpose electronically-coupled dials, and keeps the mode dial down to four positions (MASP) instead of five (MASPV) by disabling the video capabilities that its sensor and processing chips certainly have.

A solution in search of a problem, if you ask me, but this is something that clearly was driven by the marketing department all along.

[Bernard ODonovan]

I really like it.

Beats those so called retro models in the past that just had a big program dial and retro styling. This is the real deal, right down to a traditional shutter release...

Well done NIKON !

[Ben Rubinstein]

Looks like they took the top plate of a rather over cluttered '80's film camera and stuck it on top of a DSLR. Yeuch.

[TMARK]

. . . this is something that clearly was driven by the marketing department all along.

This is not my information.  At all.  My source, who is in advertising, tells me that a group within Nikon developed the camera because its what they wanted in a DSLR.  Prototypes sat around for a long time, with different sensors, and was OK'd for production fairly recently. 

[Chairman Bill]

I just hope the threat of the D600-like, 39 point focussing is wrong. It might be OK in an APS-C sensor, but not an FX - we need a wider range of focus point options in the frame. Cluttering them all together in the centre is just silly

[AFairley]

This is not my information.  At all.  My source, who is in advertising, tells me that a group within Nikon developed the camera because its what they wanted in a DSLR.  Prototypes sat around for a long time, with different sensors, and was OK'd for production fairly recently. 

Very interesting, thanks. 

[BJL]

I just belatedly noticed something ironic: the allegedly retro-styled, old-school Nikon Df is being shown with an AF-S Nikkor 50mm 1:1.8 G as its kit lens --- "G" meaning no aperture ring, so its aperture must be set the new-fangled way, from the body.


All I can say is "Nostalgia ain't what it used to be."