Cycling and bicycle discussion forums. 
   Click here to join our community Log in to access your Control Panel  


Go Back   > >

Foo Off-Topic chit chat with no general subject.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 01-11-08, 12:43 AM   #1
Pheard
Banned
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: South City, Ca
Bikes:
Posts: 3,348
Nikon F5

I was told I could find one for cheap used.

If someone was to take a photography class, and a film SLR was required.... would this be a good choice?

I heard the F5 was almost top of the line awhile ago in the 90s for slr film cams. Was hoping to find one for under 300, is it possible to find a Nikon F5 of any year, along with a decent and/or nice lens?
Pheard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-08, 12:50 AM   #2
x136 
phony collective progress
 
x136's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Hoosey
Bikes: http://velospace.org/user/36663
Posts: 2,981
I would think an F5 would be overkill for a photography class. I think you'd want more along the lines of a Nikon FM10, something manual.
__________________
x136 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-08, 12:55 AM   #3
Pheard
Banned
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: South City, Ca
Bikes:
Posts: 3,348
Yea the F5 is huge. How about an f4 older model for.... 250$?

Pheard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-08, 01:24 AM   #4
mlts22 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Bikes:
Posts: 998
F4s are pretty good if you find one in servicable condition. They were made from the frame up to take a beating.

Even an old N2020 would do, provided you can find a flash that works with it.
mlts22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-08, 04:46 AM   #5
c0urt
moving target
 
c0urt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: birmingham, al
Bikes: a masi speciale, and a kuota k-factor.
Posts: 2,827
this one maybe ?
c0urt is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-08, 05:46 AM   #6
Stacey
Non Tribuo Anus Rodentum and off to the next adventure (RIP)
 
Stacey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Bikes:
Posts: 9,162
Bare bones it for a class. Mamiya-Sekor DTL500/1000



I wish I still had mine. My dad stole it.
__________________
Stacey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-08, 07:11 AM   #7
R900
Double Secret Probation
 
R900's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Eastern Indiana
Bikes: Madone 6 series SSL, Cannondale CX9, Trek TTX, Trek 970, Trek T2000
Posts: 2,578
I just sold my N80 for $100 w/film, extra batteries, etc...

BTW: Why is the prof using film, when everything has gone to digital, seems it would be better to learn the ins and outs of digital then somewhat more forgiving film. Although old school is cool, just wondering...
__________________
Time to Ride...
R900 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-08, 07:54 AM   #8
dewaday
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: upper devonian
Bikes:
Posts: 894
I've got a Nikon FE that a friend used in a photo class not long ago. He had it checked and cleaned and it tested fine. Let me know if your interested. It's got a Tamron 35-80 2.8-4 lens attached ATM. $100 would do it. Think I even have a MD-12 motor drive somewhere. If I do I'll throw it in. It's 80's era stuff, but pretty clean for it's age.

While I'm at it, I've also got mint condition SB-50DX and SB-80DX speedlights, if interested. Or how about a D1X? D100?

F5's are cool, but definitely overkill. If you can find a clean one for 300, I'd jump on it.
dewaday is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-08, 12:45 PM   #9
DannoXYZ 
Senior Member
 
DannoXYZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Saratoga, CA
Bikes:
Posts: 11,600
Personally, one of my favorite cameras of all time is the Olympus XA line:


http://www.urban75.org/photos/olympus-xa.html
http://www.cosmonet.org/camera/olympus_xa_e.html

Split-prism viewfinder for accurate focusing. Fully manual shutter/aperture control. Some of my finest photos were taken with that camera.
DannoXYZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-08, 12:46 PM   #10
ModoVincere
Riding Heaven's Highways on the grand tour
 
ModoVincere's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Bikes:
Posts: 1,675
For a class, a Pentax K1000 would be ideal and cheap.
__________________
1 bronze, 0 silver, 1 gold
ModoVincere is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-08, 12:54 PM   #11
explody pup
Guest
 
Bikes:
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by ModoVincere View Post
For a class, a Pentax K1000 would be ideal and cheap.
Especially w/ the inexpensive SMC-coated 50mm, f1.4 lenses that can be had. The body makes little difference, especially in a film camera. The only consideration should be your budget and how it feels in your hands.

Go inexpensive and used until you know exactly what you want. Might even try Yashica SLRs. The Yashica TL Super is a ****ing great camera if you can find it with the 50mm, f1.7 lens.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-08, 01:07 PM   #12
ModoVincere
Riding Heaven's Highways on the grand tour
 
ModoVincere's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Bikes:
Posts: 1,675
I personally love my Olympus OM10..great camera and easy to use...lots of lenses too.
__________________
1 bronze, 0 silver, 1 gold
ModoVincere is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-08, 01:11 PM   #13
jsharr
You Know!? For Kids!
 
jsharr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Just NW of Richardson Bike Mart
Bikes: '05 Trek 1200 / '90 Trek 8000 / '? Falcon Europa
Posts: 6,153
Have you looked at the Fisher Price Kid Tough line of equipment?
__________________
Are you a registered member? Why not? Click here to register. It's free and only takes 27 seconds! Help out the forums, abide by our community guidelines.
Quote:
Originally Posted by colorider View Post
Phobias are for irrational fears. Fear of junk ripping badgers is perfectly rational. Those things are nasty.
jsharr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-08, 02:07 PM   #14
Pheard
Banned
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: South City, Ca
Bikes:
Posts: 3,348
Quote:
Originally Posted by R900 View Post
I just sold my N80 for $100 w/film, extra batteries, etc...

BTW: Why is the prof using film, when everything has gone to digital, seems it would be better to learn the ins and outs of digital then somewhat more forgiving film. Although old school is cool, just wondering...
Do you know much about photography?

Ken Rockwell did a digital vs. film SLR comparison, and if you were to compare detail of an f4(used for 250$) to a Nikon d300(2000$) the MP comparison is something like 12.3 to 100mp. Film SLRs seem to take wayyyyy better detailed pictures. There certainly is a tradeoff involved, the convenience of the digitals. Not to mention the small disposable lithium batteries that last through 100s of rolls of film.

Now as far as the class, it's bringing it back to basics. Developing in the dark room, discussing basic technique, etc. Need a film SLR for that.
Pheard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-08, 02:12 PM   #15
dudewtfhillary
Member
 
dudewtfhillary's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: kentucky!
Bikes: touchy. pout.
Posts: 29
I found it much easier to start (film) photo classes with a super old-school camera, everything manual, and then graduate to nicer cameras and more buttons.
dudewtfhillary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-08, 02:20 PM   #16
c0urt
moving target
 
c0urt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: birmingham, al
Bikes: a masi speciale, and a kuota k-factor.
Posts: 2,827
actually since it is for a class I can see if i can get my hand on my minolta for you

if so I will give it to you and you can find out if it works. but it will be atleast ten days till i can get where it is





c0urt is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-08, 02:34 PM   #17
alanfleisig
NYC Maggie Backstedt fan
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: New York City
Bikes: Trek road and hybrid bikes
Posts: 471
The F5 was a great camera.

I still shoot film almost all the time. E5 and E6 Fujichrome and Ilford B&W. I have low-res scans done for $5 when the film is processed, and I have a 4000 dpi film scanner on my desk for any real winners.

I've been using computers for going on thirty years. Files older than 10 years are basically unretrievable without a major expense. But I have boxes of 50 and 60 year old chromes that look like they were shot yesterday. And used correctly, the quality is equal or superior to results you'd have to spend $10K or more to get with digital equipment. Besides, it's good to learn the old skills.

That said, my Nikons became unbearable to carry and travel with. So I shoot with a Voigtlander rangefinder with Leica lenses. I would recommend looking at a high-quality, interchangeable-lens rangefinder for your photo class, rather than the uber-heavy automatic SLRs of the 90s. Although, I would endorse another poster's recommendation of something like a Nikon FM10, or an old Nikkormat (which you would probably get for $50).
alanfleisig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-08, 02:45 PM   #18
dewaday
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: upper devonian
Bikes:
Posts: 894
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pheard View Post
Ken Rockwell did a digital vs. film SLR comparison, and if you were to compare detail of an f4(used for 250$) to a Nikon d300(2000$) the MP comparison is something like 12.3 to 100mp. Film SLRs seem to take wayyyyy better detailed pictures.
I'd be leery of comparisons like this, sounds like an agenda at work. Trying to get 100mp out of a 35mm frame is likely to yield mostly mush. Without throwing a bunch of numbers around, I'd say todays 35mm DSLR's capture pretty close to what you'd scan from a good medium format film, and top end medium format digital backs capture what used to require 4x5 film, in terms of useable resolution. Trying to do a direct resolution comparison is pretty tough, but the claim above is pretty absurd.
dewaday is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-08, 02:45 PM   #19
timmyquest
Banned.
 
timmyquest's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Woodstock
Bikes:
Posts: 5,761
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pheard View Post
Do you know much about photography?

Ken Rockwell did a digital vs. film SLR comparison, and if you were to compare detail of an f4(used for 250$) to a Nikon d300(2000$) the MP comparison is something like 12.3 to 100mp. Film SLRs seem to take wayyyyy better detailed pictures. There certainly is a tradeoff involved, the convenience of the digitals. Not to mention the small disposable lithium batteries that last through 100s of rolls of film.

Now as far as the class, it's bringing it back to basics. Developing in the dark room, discussing basic technique, etc. Need a film SLR for that.
heeeere we goooooo

I would take that little "study" with a grain of salt It says nothing of grain/noise or dynamic range and of course ease of use/cost etc. Pro's are slowly migrating over to digital more and more...large format film cameras are on the way out, plain truth.

Also, keep in mind, when you scan film you can scan it to whatever MP you want. If i had a scanner that could do it, i could scan a 35mm frame to 10000000000mp if i wanted...it's a matter of quality pixels

Last edited by timmyquest; 01-11-08 at 02:54 PM.
timmyquest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-08, 02:57 PM   #20
John C. Ratliff
Senior Member
 
John C. Ratliff's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Beaverton, Oregon
Bikes: Rans Stratus, Trek 1420, Rivendell Rambouillet
Posts: 1,906
I have enjoyed Canon FD manual cameras. I still have two very good bodies, the Canon F-1N and the Canon T-90. I had a very nice Canon FT-QL for years, and took this photo with it in the 1980s:


I just recently went digital, with a Canon Rebel Xti, and have enjoyed it. But it does take some getting used to, as the exposure parameters are different, and what you get is not necessarily what you had hoped for. Here is one that I took with the digital:


The one thing to remember is that with a film camera, you have an original photo. I recently went through some photos I took with a Nikonos II underwater camera, and found things in them that I had not seen originally. Here's one of my photos of a freshwater mussel spawning in the 1980s:


And here's a photo I took in 1967 while training at the US Naval School for Underwater Swimmers:


I have kept these slides and photos for over thirty years. I'm not sure that I'll even be able to read my digital photos twenty years from now. And CDs are not archieval (they made that decision a number of years ago--they could have been). So while I'm enjoying my digital camera, I've still got my film cameras.

One thing to remember is that the only photo of President Clinton with Monica L. was made by a film camera. All the digital images of that event had been erased. I have gone back 25 to 30 years to find photos which I did not think were consequential, but which actually documented something special. I took one photo of Indians fishing with dip nets in the Deschutes River in the 1960s. In the mid-1990s, a woman contacted me through my brother's friend, and told me that these were the only photos she had of her mother fishing. She asked if I could perhaps find the originals, and make copies. I was able to find them, and get her nice enlargements of these photos.

John

Last edited by John C. Ratliff; 01-11-08 at 03:12 PM.
John C. Ratliff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-08, 03:08 PM   #21
BikeWNC
Climbing Above It All
 
BikeWNC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Basking in the Sun.
Bikes:
Posts: 4,146
Any of the older film cameras would be great for your class. You don't need auto anything, just a plain manual camera. I have a Pentax K1000 and an Olympus OM-2n. My daughter's baby sitter borrowed the OM-2n for a school project not too long ago. She used my Zuiko 24 F2 lens with it. The pics came out great. You don't need to spend a lot of money on this camera.
BikeWNC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-08, 03:17 PM   #22
roadfix
hello
 
roadfix's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Bikes:
Posts: 18,532
Stay away from the the original F series for beginning photography. If you like Nikons, Nikkormats are good if you can still find them in good condition. You can be cool, retro, and have a great camera.

Last edited by roadfix; 01-11-08 at 03:22 PM.
roadfix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-08, 03:18 PM   #23
timmyquest
Banned.
 
timmyquest's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Woodstock
Bikes:
Posts: 5,761
Quote:
Originally Posted by John C. Ratliff View Post
One thing to remember is that the only photo of President Clinton with Monica L. was made by a film camera. All the digital images of that event had been erased. I have gone back 25 to 30 years to find photos which I did not think were consequential, but which actually documented something special. I took one photo of Indians fishing with dip nets in the Deschutes River in the 1960s. In the mid-1990s, a woman contacted me through my brother's friend, and told me that these were the only photos she had of her mother fishing. She asked if I could perhaps find the originals, and make copies. I was able to find them, and get her nice enlargements of these photos.

John
There is something truly magical about working with film right from the moment you push that button to the instant you start to see the picture coming through under that dim red light...not something you'll ever get with digital.

But...at some point you have to decide if your enjoying nostalgia or photography
timmyquest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-08, 03:21 PM   #24
Pheard
Banned
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: South City, Ca
Bikes:
Posts: 3,348
Quote:
Originally Posted by timmyquest View Post
heeeere we goooooo

I would take that little "study" with a grain of salt It says nothing of grain/noise or dynamic range and of course ease of use/cost etc. Pro's are slowly migrating over to digital more and more...large format film cameras are on the way out, plain truth.

Also, keep in mind, when you scan film you can scan it to whatever MP you want. If i had a scanner that could do it, i could scan a 35mm frame to 10000000000mp if i wanted...it's a matter of quality pixels
That's exactly true, but the bottom line is the quality of the picture DSLR v SLR on a smalled cropped spot, the film SLR is much clearer. I completely agree the DSLRs are nicer, my point is that film SLRs shouldn't be ruled out.

The best part to me about the move to digital, is that the older film SLRs are cheap! I'm still looking into getting a D80, but a film SLR.. or two wouldn't be so bad.
Pheard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-08, 03:24 PM   #25
timmyquest
Banned.
 
timmyquest's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Woodstock
Bikes:
Posts: 5,761
Quote:
That's exactly true, but the bottom line is the quality of the picture DSLR v SLR on a smalled cropped spot, the film SLR is much clearer. I completely agree the DSLRs are nicer, my point is that film SLRs shouldn't be ruled out.
Agree to disagree
timmyquest is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:19 AM.