christian_fox

Roland, It was your link that led me to become aware of F3 Production Codes. Based on your experience over time, do you have a best guess about my example? Christian

This forum entry is for those who take interest in the Nikon F3 serial number vs production code saga. I have always wanted to know the last standard F3 serial number produced on the assembly line before top plates with serial numbers were produced for repair replacement needs. Has anyone come across a forum discussion about this topic? Curious to know the most advanced serial number known for a standard F3 model (i.e. not a special titanium or press model). I own a Nikon F3 body with an HP viewfinder. The serial number is 20077xx and the production code inside the camera behind the back film cover hinge is 37VN. I had expected this serial number to have been produced after the year 2000, but the production code suggests an earlier camera body produced in March 1997. Supposedly, the last serial number block for the standard model F3 production is 200xxxx and the replacement top plates begin at 201xxxx. I doubt very much that Nikon produced a F3 camera as late as March 2007. My theory is that this serial number is post production and possibly a replacement top plate. If not, a seller may have removed this top plate from a damaged late serial number body and installed it on a clean older body for a premium sale. Your thoughts?

Mike, your post was interesting. I opened the RX and examined the mirror relative to its plate. I can't say that the mirror has slipped, but there is a very small overhang - natural or not I don't know. I attempted to push the mirror up the plate with my fingers, just to see what happens, and the mirror was solid - no movement that I could see. I lightly wiggled the entire mirror housing a bit. I fired the shutter without lens and the mirror moves as it should. I then affixed the CZ 100/3.5 lens, fiddled with the aperture settings, and the combination now works fine. I have no clue what has transpired, but thank you for your advice.

I apologize. I am referring to the RX. Could I have activated MLU function? This camera worked fine with a Yashica ML 50 but I no longer have that lens. I bought the CZ T* 100/3.5 on eBay.

I have a fresh battery in a Contax DX. The shutter and mirror works fine without a lens. One I affix a CZ Sonnar 100/3.5 T* lens, it appears that the aperture closes and the VF is black when I press the shutter. It sounds like the mirror bounces back to its normal position. Can a lens be defective?

I missed this reference - thank you. The gold lettering is strong in the Camera Wiki black F sample. No production data on the black version. I have never seen a chrome F with gold lettering - the paint must have worn out over time.

I am curious to know if Olympus ever produced an original black Pen F with the gothic F front plate. I am only aware of original chrome F, chrome or black FT, and chrome FV. I assume anyone selling a black of blue Pen F is a re-painted sample. I am surprised the recent digital Pen F did not include the beautiful gothic F - it would have added so much charm.

<p>I like to discover intimate information, like that fact that the Leica R8 early production had a tendency to scratch the film, and the R9 resolved that problem. It drives me crazy when I read a claim like this and no serial number breaks or dates are mentioned. Questions come to my mind, like, was the entire R8 production run subject to this issue?</p> <p>The MIR site mentions that the late production run of the Nikon FM was better built internally. It appears that we do not see that unless there is a repair issue for earlier versions. </p> <p> </p>

<p>My inquiry was not intended to focus on Nikon only, but the Nikon observations are interesting.</p> <p>John, thank you for your contribution to the FM series. I was not aware of these variants. I also believe the FM2 had a transition with the honeycomb shutter within the model's late life. I may be confused, as it may be the FM2n's early life. I would be curious if anyone had a model and approximate serial number range on that transition. </p> <p>I am surprised Nikon never transitioned to a smoother "razor" focus wheel on its RF series. I shook my head in disbelief when I sampled the recently produced replica Nikon S3 - same old razor wheel. Even a replica should take out the kinks.</p>

<p>I have been sampling classic cameras for a little while, and I am curious about variations of favorite cameras. I am not referring to different configurations, like alternative viewfinders, but simply updates or changes made to the the same model. I would imagine this applies more to a long running model that was revolutionary to the market at the time. </p> <p>My favorite example is the original Nikon F. Uli Koch's book and the online Nikon F Collection and Typology reveal several variations of this camera as it evolved towards the F2. For the Nikon F, I would imagine it would would drive a collector crazy to find every example of this camera's external or functional changes, all the way down to the flash contact post insulation (white, black, square, semi-circular). I like to recognize variations of the late model Nikon F, but of course, possible user manipulation has to be considered as well. </p> <p>Learning about serial number milestones is very interesting as well. Certain cameras have a flaw up to a certain serial number before it was improved, and its good to know that. If I do not find a table anywhere, I will tally serial numbers I find on ebay or online for a specific camera of interest, and note the configuration of that serial number. </p> <p>I would like to ask the CMC community if specific camera models of any brand are well known for its variants, or if one captured a reader's attention for a while. Of course, we all have different interests, so one person may be fascinated with a wide range of variations, while another reader may only be interested in the significant change of a one feature, like the M3 single stroke vs double stroke film advance lever. Do you have favorite references for a specific camera, like Koch's trilogy? </p> <p>I would imagine that the evolution of a brand's prime lens may have an interesting evolution as well. </p>

<p>Tony,</p> <p>Your post is why I come to Photo.net. Your efforts to share this camera is warmly appreciated, and you know what, it will be appreciated years to come when someone wants to search the Nikon S2.</p> <p>I recently sampled a Nikon S. Amazingly heavy chrome for such a little camera. Pinhole viewfinder, but I give its RF patch considerable respect, as it offers a well defined square patch. A lucky sample? </p> <p>I also sampled a modern replica Nikon S3 and the RF patch is, to my shock, hardly defined at all, and I sense a lot of flare. Perhaps a poor sample.</p> <p>I tend to favor a RF by its VF visibility and RF focus ability, and I note tremendous variation. Of course, samples are affected by age. The Canon P is decent with some degree of flare, while the Leica M3 is my favorite, and that is all I have seen.</p> <p>Christian </p> <p> </p>

<p>Yes, these guys actually took pictures.<br> I bumped into Galen in a Yosemite shop but did not get into a deep conversation with him. Too bad the opportunity is gone since I no longer visit the park from my home in the vicinity. He was associated with Patagonia clothing, and I have followed that outfit since their first rugby shirt. I like his monastery image. Never heard of McCurry until the Afghan photo. <br> To be honest, I Googled the Internet three times for each and the number was the same - naturally, two sources may have erroneously derived from the first source. Every so often, you will see folks mix coverage vs magnification. </p>

<p>The FM2 is 86x and the FM3a is 83x. The MX and OM-1 hit the roof over 90x, but I don't see magnifications over 85x often. I used my own hunch when I labeled the Nikon FM2 as legendary. Take it away from a whole lot of users in the day, and you'll have a riot on your hands. Maybe the FM2 comes to mind as legendary from my memories of Galen Rowell or the Afghan Girl. </p>

<p>Sampling, not collecting - that is the term I use. I am just sampling the field to discover which cameras are interesting. Some stay for a while, some pass on to another owner, and some even come back as I have gained a different perspective or taste for things. Recently, two cameras have returned in a slightly different form - the Nikon FM3a in black w/ a diopter that works for my eyes, and a nice black Pentax MX with a hand grip motor drive. Viewfinder magnification is my theme of interest at the moment. Besides durability and cost, I wonder if a relatively high VF magnification was a significant reason why the Nikon FM2 became a legend. Like collecting vintage fountain pens years ago, I struggle with the balance between favorites bodies and desired lenses - the two preferences may not be the same brand. At least with fountain pens, I could swap the nib to the desired pen if the size was right. My dreamworld is to affix slippery smooth focusing C/Y lenses, without altercation, on Nikon and non-Minolta Leica R cameras. </p>

<p>I meant to say that Darin is adverse to Primes. </p> <p> </p>