The design of the F4 is amazing - such a beast of a camera!
That said I've found that I enjoy cameras without manual film advance much less. I only use the motorized ones when it's about getting the image and not the experience, or because they're super lightweight (in my case that's the Nikon F65 or Canon 3000N). The F4 is definitely *not* lightweight
Desmolicious wrote:
I've owned two F4s, and think my F6 is a better manually focusing camera.
For several reasons:
1. The screen itself - without needing to use any of the digital aids - is much more accurate and easier to use. It snaps in and out of focus really nicely. Plus you can get it from Nikon with a split screen, microprism etc.
2. The digital aids/indicators are more accurate due to the fact that it has a more modern AF system.
3. Because there are more AF focus points, you can manually focus w/o needing to focus/recompose. it also has the benefit of using the picked focus point as the spot meter point.
These reasons are actually why I sold my F4s and kept the F6....Show more →
Huss, With normal vision I'm sure you are right, but my excellent vision went kablewy <(sp?) in the fall of 2023. The one focusing aid that has stood the test of time is a split prism. You don't have to judge a field of view or area of view. You just have to align a line. I have a split prism brightscreen coming today for my Mamiya C3.hoping it will allow me to continue using it. Nikkors on Canon's EOS mount give me two indications - a light and a beep. Nikon uses only the green dot on manual focus, but no beep - but on AF, when I don't need it - it beeps. Has always bothered me. The lights in the F4 are so bright for direction of focus correction and for critical focus that it is hard to miss. I wanted a camera that could mount non-ai to afs, and the F4 does.. Sold both FM's because they lacked AF, and I know that is where things are headed for me.
Desmolicious wrote:
Basically the most important thing is that that the exposure readout LCDs are not leaking.
Shutter failure is also very important to check as it can occur without being noticed until after receiving unexposed film from the lab. It was such a problem that a sensor was added to the F5.
I bought an F4s shortly after they came out. At the time I was a stringer for AP and also did a lot of PR work. One of the best things I liked was the the TTL flash fill which worked great. Used my F4s for several years before getting a staff newspaper job. Never had a problem with mine.
I think the F4 is a great design, probably the last of the "knobs and locks-on-knobs" UI bodies from the Nikon pro-line. However, with no removable motor-drive, and even the smallest battery being quite large, the F4 was just too big for me and I stuck with my F3/T. Yes, would have _loved_ the F4's matrix-metering, better finder, and (primitive) AF capabilities, but I just wasn't willing to carry around such a big body to get those features. Also, I'm kind of "all in" with my complete collection of F3 finders and accessories, and the F4 finders were _very_ pricey in the day.
You'd think they could improve older designs like this with 20-30+ years advancement in CAD etc. Wish they'd do that instead of extremely high distortion etc. on the newer lenses. I don't necessarily need 24mm nice to have but on a good day I'd take something 21mm or less.
You'd think they could improve older designs like this with 20-30+ years advancement in CAD etc. Wish they'd do that instead of extremely high distortion etc. on the newer lenses. I don't necessarily need 24mm nice to have but on a good day I'd take something 21mm or less.
On film, on a 12mp D700, I always enjoyed the 28-105. I don't have it anymore, but was a nice lens that I used for a time in the early 2010's when i had my D700. Was an excellent walkaround lens. Not to be confused with some of the more modern lenses certainly for overall performance, but I always found it to be a nice lens to have.
grantgoodes wrote:
I think the F4 is a great design, probably the last of the "knobs and locks-on-knobs" UI bodies from the Nikon pro-line. However, with no removable motor-drive, and even the smallest battery being quite large, the F4 was just too big for me and I stuck with my F3/T. Yes, would have _loved_ the F4's matrix-metering, better finder, and (primitive) AF capabilities, but I just wasn't willing to carry around such a big body to get those features. Also, I'm kind of "all in" with my complete collection of F3 finders and accessories, and the F4 finders were _very_ pricey in the day....Show more →
I was just perusing the prices for an F4 and it looks like a great time to buy one. A clean FM might cost about the same. Maybe just a bad time to buy an FM .
Cool camera, but way too big and bulky for me.
These two gentlemen ran this scooter/alfa repair shop in Sacramento. A really cool facility and I hate that I forget their names. They welcomed me to come by and shoot the inside of the garage whenever I wanted. I was going to take them up on that but before I could an arsonist set fire to their shop one night.
The Bed n Breakfast down the street from me was also torched.
You'd think they could improve older designs like this with 20-30+ years advancement in CAD etc. Wish they'd do that instead of extremely high distortion etc. on the newer lenses. I don't necessarily need 24mm nice to have but on a good day I'd take something 21mm or less.
While totally fine on film, I just found it too bulky and replaced it with the much more enjoyable to use (and better optically) 28-80 kit lenses.
I have both the D and G versions (the D came with a Nikon N80 for $30 totall). I prefer the G just because it is more compact - optical quality is the same. Even though the D has the aperture ring, I do not recommend this lens - or the 28-105D - to be used on a manual focus body.
This is because the focus throw on these AF lenses are geared so short it makes them hard to use accurately.
It was such a problem that a sensor was added to the F5. 
. 
