My one gripe with the F3HP

[FilmOnly]

I haved been enjoying this thread. It seems a minor issue (or flaw) has brought forth a host of opinions on the F3. I once owned an F3HP, and foolishly sold it. Just prior to the start of this thread, I decided to look for another F3. I have actually bought two, an HP and a standard DE-2. The HP should arrive in a couple of days, and the DE-2 version should be here by week's end.

I would have to agree with the poster who stated that there is no perfect camera. I have owned and used many cameras, and, while some are close to perfect, I have not found a perfect camera--that is, perfect in design, handling, durability, features, cold weather performance, and available accessories and lenses. I think the F3 is perhaps close, but I agree that the viewfinder image of the HP is a bit small, the 1/80th sync speed rather paltry, and there are a couple of other minor isssues (as discussed here). Surely, it is a very nice camera. I find it interesting, though, that in the absence of my "pro" cameras (the F3 and the F-1N), I have been very happy using my Pentax Spotmatic SP II--a forty-year-old design with far fewer features than the either the F3 or the F-1N I had been using.

Perhaps the more a manufacturer adds to a camera the worse it gets? I know this sounds odd, but maybe there is some truth to it.

[Pumal]

There is nothing better than Totally Manual; no Batteries. Then comes the F3HP

[FilmOnly]

Well stated, Pumalite. Such is why I also own a Pentax SL: no batteries AND no meter. I do not know why so many rely on in-camera metering, as these meters are so easily fooled. In most cases, even side-lit shots suffer at the hands of an in-camera meter.

[lxdude]

I find it interesting, though, that in the absence of my "pro" cameras (the F3 and the F-1N), I have been very happy using my Pentax Spotmatic SP II--a forty-year-old design with far fewer features than the either the F3 or the F-1N I had been using.

Perhaps the more a manufacturer adds to a camera the worse it gets? I know this sounds odd, but maybe there is some truth to it.

An astute observation. More and more, I care less and less about features and enjoy the simplicity of the older stuff. For example, I recently handled an OM-1 for the first time in many years and was reveling in its simple goodness. Easy handling and oh, that viewfinder!

[lxdude]

I didn't know it existed.
My gripe is AE lock button. This thing came off and I can't put it back. I heard this is a common problem with F3.

I've heard that. I've not had a problem myself. It seems spares are still pretty easy to find.

[clayne]

The VF in the F3 and F3HP is stellar. You can choose to use the other features (of which there aren't that many) or just treat it as a normal manual camera.

[lxdude]

The VF in the F3 and F3HP is stellar. You can choose to use the other features (of which there aren't that many) or just treat it as a normal manual camera.

Agreed.
I do wish the + and - symbols on manual were larger, especially in lower light.
As was said earlier, no camera is perfect.

I like the HP finder because I wear glasses, and the eye relief is great. My LX's is as bright and has better contrast, so is a real treat to use for that reason. I use the FA-1W finder, the Pentax equivalent to the HP. It has a larger image but less eye relief compared to the HP finder, so the HP is easier to use in that regard. My MX has a finder about the same size as the OM-1's but the OM-1's is brighter and less coarse, though with a little less contrast. A screen from the LX improves the MX's finder a lot.
I like a plain matte screen and the F3's is my favorite. The screen selection for the F3 is awesome, with new ones still easy to find.

[John_Nikon_F]

There is nothing better than Totally Manual; no Batteries. Then comes the F3HP

Well, true, although, there's also the bodies like the F2A, F Photomic FTn, FM2n, Nikkormat FT series, which are also pretty darn close to the Totally Manual, no battery ideal.

-J