Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,762   Posts: 1,516,165   Online: 978
      
Page 7 of 18 FirstFirst 1234567891011121317 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 173
  1. #61
    ArtO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    259
    Images
    3
    Ran about 1/2 roll of XP2 through one of my F2's today. I'll finish it off during the week. I love the weight and feel of this camera.
    ------------------------------------------------------------
    Art

  2. #62
    Richard Sintchak (rich815)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    San Francisco area
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,806
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by ArtO View Post
    Ran about 1/2 roll of XP2 through one of my F2's today. I'll finish it off during the week. I love the weight and feel of this camera.
    I know! You can hammer nails with it!
    -----------------------

    "Well, my photos are actually much better than they look..."

    Richard S.
    Albany, CA (San Francisco bay area)

    My Flickr River of photographs
    http://flickriver.com/photos/rich815...r-interesting/

    My Photography Website
    http://www.lightshadowandtone.com

  3. #63

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    379
    Quote Originally Posted by Viggi View Post
    I do like following threads where people extol the reliability and build quality of their equipment. I like hefty, well constructed and (sometimes) well-crafted and tactile cameras. But reading through this thread from the first post on just highlighted the clichés used like cheap currency. "Built like a tank" - please, stop saying that. Is it a good thing? Heavy, unwieldy... just over-used phrase and not at all meaningful any more. And "hammer nails with it" - really? Has anyone tried it? Don't think any camera will stand up that. And it is also a boring, banal statement. "It's a weapon" - yes, in as much as any moderately heavy object can be. So what. Your camera is heavy. Big deal.

    Like this thread though - nice info and love for a good camera.
    AH, AN UNBELIEVER! SOMEBODY SWING AN F2 AT 'IM PLEASE!

    (just no DP-3, they're getting rare... )

  4. #64

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    18

    Use the F2

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Goutiere View Post
    I remember buying my first Nikon F2, used, in 1985. I thought I'd died and gone to heaven.
    Occasionally I take it out as a second body to My F3 or F4, but for the most part it sits on a shelf.

    It's not that I use a lot of 35mm these days preferring my medium format cameras and their great negatives, but I wonder if
    perhaps I should use the F2 a bit more.

    Does anyone use their F2 on exclusively or on a regular basis?

    Attachment 55057
    Oh yes. It's a beautiful machine. Sometimes with the DP-12 on it or meterless. Mechanical ingenuity....

  5. #65
    D1v1d's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    London, UK
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    27
    Images
    4
    My best film shots are with my F2S. Just back from servicing . Check out my portfolio (all F2S:
    http://dasmithuk.500px.com/rainy_day/#/0
    David Smith
    London, UK
    email: dasmith.uk@gmail.com
    Flickr: D1v1d
    Twitter: D1v1d

  6. #66

    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    294
    Quote Originally Posted by Viggi View Post
    I do like following threads where people extol the reliability and build quality of their equipment. I like hefty, well constructed and (sometimes) well-crafted and tactile cameras. But reading through this thread from the first post on just highlighted the clichés used like cheap currency. "Built like a tank" - please, stop saying that. Is it a good thing? Heavy, unwieldy... just over-used phrase and not at all meaningful any more. And "hammer nails with it" - really? Has anyone tried it? Don't think any camera will stand up that. And it is also a boring, banal statement. "It's a weapon" - yes, in as much as any moderately heavy object can be. So what. Your camera is heavy. Big deal.

    Like this thread though - nice info and love for a good camera.
    Thank you!
    Heavy doesn't mean its well built, it just means its heavy...
    Efficient engineering means you have a well made product using the minimal amount of material needed to do such a job

    I love my F2AS, and its a wonderful camera, but when you walk around holding your camera (not a fan of straps), you notice it real quickly
    I'm pretty sure my F3/MD4 combo is lighter without batteries

  7. #67
    John_Nikon_F's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Duvall, WA, USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,393
    Images
    2
    ^ If your F2AS has a MD-1/MB-1 or MD-2/MB-1 with alkalines, yes, that'd be true. Body itself, lighter than the F3/MD-4 combo, but slightly heavier than the F3 alone, which weighs the same as a Nikkormat FTn (also is the same size as said 'mat).

    -J
    APUG: F5, F4s, F3P, F2ASx2, F
    DPUG: D200
    Nikkors: 18-70/3.5-4.5G AF-S DX (f/D200), 35/2 O, 50/1.4 AI, 50/1.4 S, 50/1.8 AF, 50/2 H, 85/1.8 K, 105/4 Micro AIS

    My FB - My flickr stream
    My SmugMug

  8. #68

    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Utah Valley
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    272
    Quote Originally Posted by GarageBoy View Post
    I love my F2AS, and its a wonderful camera, but when you walk around holding your camera (not a fan of straps), you notice it real quickly
    I'm the same way, I don't like camera straps. The MD-1/2 provides more grip than the camera alone, but its square shape doesn't lend itself to a comfortable grip. It's also heavy. In order to save weight, I've tried using my MD-1 without the battery pack, but I didn't like it. I found I'd grown used to resting my pinky on the battery pack and without it, my finger rested on the hard edge (also, the motordrive obviously doesn't work without batteries, and I use the MR-2 secondary release a lot). I want to try an MD-3; its round shape reminds me of the MD-12, which is extremely comfortable and provides superior grip. The MD-3 doesn't have a rewind feature though, which is something I would miss.

    The MD-4 is a nice shape, but it gets really slippery since the grip is just painted metal without much texture.

  9. #69

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    379
    Quote Originally Posted by LJSLATER View Post
    I want to try an MD-3...
    Anecdotal evidence, I know, but still--nothing but (reliability) grief with MD-3; gave up on them altogether entirely after missing shot after shot. I work my drives relatively hard, pretending the digi revolution never happened--MD-2 is worth its weight in gold... Hey, just think you're holding a gold bar, it might work!



    PS. Have you tried lithium AAs in the MD-2? Noticeably lighter and faster.

  10. #70

    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Utah Valley
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    272
    Quote Originally Posted by Vilk View Post
    Anecdotal evidence, I know, but still--nothing but (reliability) grief with MD-3; gave up on them altogether entirely after missing shot after shot. I work my drives relatively hard, pretending the digi revolution never happened--MD-2 is worth its weight in gold... Hey, just think you're holding a gold bar, it might work!



    PS. Have you tried lithium AAs in the MD-2? Noticeably lighter and faster.
    Did the gears in your MD-3 break?

    I LOVE lithium batteries. I started using them for their lighter weight, but they also seem less likely to leak.



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin