OT> Nikonos on Land, anyone?

It may sound crazy, but how about a Nikonos 1, 2, or 3 for use on land

surface as a cheap 35mm rangefinder with lenses...Any ideas, experiences, or flames

will be much appreciated.

Thanks!

ethan

I use a Nikonos V and also have had a IVa as well. There are great underwater and OK

above the water. Only the 35 and the 80 can be used above the water. The big

problem is that the 35 flares quite easily on land (no such troubles under the water)

and that it is not easy to scale focusing an 80 mm lens.

 

The Nikonos system requires EXTENSIVE and THOROUGH maintanence to use in water

otherwise you have a bunch of worthless gear in about 15 seconds.

I'm seriously considering it as it's been pouring almost non-stop here for a week. The IV has aperture-priority--which might be nice. I'm sure people used them terristrially quite a bit before "weather proof" cameras make their début. You certainly wouldn't have to worry about one getting bashed, they're designed for it.

sorry for my initial post's broken english. I am looking to use this OUT of the water.

Thanks!

ethan

Nikonos is great. I had a III and worked with a V.

 

THe 35/2.5 W-Nikkor is outstandingly sharp, but can flare unless kept scrupulously clean. There is a small shade made for it. Use it.

 

A better idea for rainy day camera is the still available, but long discontinued Canon A-1 P/S which does std 24x36 panorama 24x?? and is waterproof to 16 feet. It also has flash, and AF, and high eyepoint finder. There's also a new Elf model that has waterproofing to 16 feet, more than adequate for rainy day shooting.

I used a Nikonos 3 for years as a "wet" camera. I would take it to the base of

waterfalls and other areas where it would get wet. I only used the 35mm lens and it

worked fine. I had the OEM rubber lenshood that helped a little with the flare. This

worked better than a regular lenshood since it covers up most of the big protective

glass at the front of the lens.

 

The winding mechanics of the camera made it work pretty quickly, but it is a scale

focusing camera, not a rangefinder, so you have to estimate distances and need an

external meter.

 

Nikonos 1 and 2 (along with the original Calypso) had a couple mechanical

weaknesses that hurt their use as users. (I repaired a lot of 1's and 2's that had a

broken rivet that Nikon replaced with a screw in the 3)

 

John

I forgot, don't I repeat DON'T waste your time with the plastic Nikon lenshood (was

sold for above water use), get the rubber one for underwater use.

I used a Nikonos V with a 35mm lens entirely trying to take shots of Song Khran (Thai new year) which is a dawn to dusk 5 day water fight.

 

http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=298412

(these are all on-land Nikonos V shots)

 

The results were mediocre at best, primarily due to a continuous film of water being on the lens, but even when it was dry I found the images somewhat disappointing when compared to even a good Nikon 35mm (SLR land-based system).

 

I think as a frequently used land camera the most frustrating aspect is the need to shoot reasonably shut down as you always have to zone focus and "guess" the distance to your subject.

 

regards

Craig / Beijing<div></div>

While the Nikonos IVa does have aperture priority, that is all it has. There is no

exposure lock and no shutter speed indication other than that it is between 1/30 and

1/1000. There is also no easy exposure compensation other than the ISO dial. If you

want an electronic Nikonos get the V.

 

BE VERY CAREFUL BUYING USED NIKONOS GEAR. Often it has been poorly maintained

and flooded. All my gear goes for biannual overhauls where every internal oring is

changed. And that is for light underwater use. It really has to be considered as

specialized gear because it only takes two or three overhauls before you have spent

more than the gear cost to buy.

 

As long as I am above the water and the water is fresh, I use my Ms. Just wipe the

moisture off and store it in a cool dry place.

Also the 35/2.5 is hardly a star performer. I mean it is OK but not much more than

that. It certainly doesn't hold a candle to the current Leica 35s or many other modern

35s for that matter. The 28 is a much much better lens but it is underwater only lens.

The 20 and the 15 are also highly regarded (no direct experience myself) but again

underwater only lenses.

John, I find your comment on the 35/2.5 W-Nikkor interesting... as mine was a contrasty tack driver. The optical formula is the same as used for the RF version 35/2.5 W-Nikkor used on the S series rangefinders. I had one of those too, and consider it perhaps better than the 35 Summicron in all respects except speed.

I have had three different Nikonos 35/2.5s and there were all the same. Not bad but

not great either. My 35/1.4A took my breath away when I saw the first slides. Here is

another review of the 35/2.5:

 

http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_nikonos.html#top_page

 

Again it is an OK lens just nothing to get excited about that's all.

Ethan, if you're serious about it, and don't scuba too much, get a

Nikonos III- It's a great camera. The main thing to check for is a

small crack which occurs in the cameras top plate when it has

been opened incorrectly, in total submersion, this will leak

slowly. Some info can be had here-

 

http://www.backscatter.com/tips/

 

I paid $175 (including 35mm "standard" lens) on ebay for mine

in excellent condition (the man who owned it used to be a sailor,

not a camera dealer). The trick is to be patient, and wait for the

right one. They are very sturdy and well built (like they used to do

with cameras) and very simple to use (you do need a meter and

a rough idea how far away things are). I found the lens to be

sharp and clear (and at f/2.5, no slouch), but for above water

use, I'd consider a red filter to increase contrast for B/W, and

maybe a polarizer for color. The (one piece, metal)camera body

is black,unlike the more recent Nikonos V 's which are either

bright red or green. The viewfinder is bright, sharp and clear,

with permanent framelines, which I honestly didn't find any less

accurate than a M6ttl (that's not really saying much, tho.)Nikonos

IV's are known to be problematic, they were the first version with

electronics (aperture priority) . Versions I, and II while excellent

cameras for their time, were a less refined design than III are

really getting on in age now. Even though by now I'm sure it's

obvious I'm a fan, the reason I bought mine was because I

couldn't take a Leica underwater.Value for money wise, you can't

go wrong.I'm planning to take mine to the coast in the next

couple of weeks and see how close to the waves I can get. Hope

this helps.

 

 

Tom

<br>

Try the <a href="http://www.minoltausa.com/eprise/main/MinoltaUSA/MUSAContent/CPG/CPGProducts?cname=cam&fname=cam_aps_vect&Mname=Vectis_Weathermatic">Konica Minolta Vectis Weathermatic</a>...

Before you get it wet read what they have here:

 

Go to

 

http://www.southern-nikonos.com/

 

and click on

 

Nikonos Workshop Series

There's a great photograph of Horst Faas using a Nikonos in Nam taken by Tim Page.

I'll see if I can find it on the web..

 

B

I have a Nikonos V and the 35 and 80mm lenses. I initially only had the 35mm for snorkelling, beach and inclement weather usage, but I was so pleased with the performace (contrast, sharpness and resolution) that I bought the 80.

 

I use the 80 soley on land and find it a very strong performer, if a bit difficult to <focus> wide open. The 35 is an excellent all around lens. (Despite the above mediocre reviews, remember that you it can be used deep underwater and then right again on the boat.) When shooting while swimming, water droplet did blur a few pictures on my first rolls, but you quickly learn to <tap tap> to make the droplets run off.

 

The idea of having the camera and resisting the tempatation to go in the water is an issue for you. The idea of having it as a <cheap> rangefinder (not a rangefinder!) is another issue. You should have the o-rings changed at least every two years and there is general maintainance to keep the camera water tight. I think that if you look at it as a inexpensive waterproof camera, your expectations will be more realistic. -- A cheap camera is one that you shouldn't care about and have the freedom to ignore. -- I think that it would be a shame to ignore the capabilities of a Nikonos. Even if you don't live near the ocean or a lake, you may be surprised at how versatile the camera can be.

 

R Fred

I had a III and had very good luck with it above water. It was a perfect "beach" camera. I found the 35mm lens to be a good performer though I never compared the slides side by side with Leica glass.

Also had the 80, but as others have said, it's almost impossible to scale focus accurately. I just used it at infinity, and finally sold it.

 

Brian pointed out its use in Viet Nam. They were used extensively there. A camera of choice when used in the field. If you dived/fell into a rice paddy, all you did was rinse it off from your canteen.

There is also a photo of photojournalist Dickey Chapelle using a I or II (along with a Leica with Viso-flex and what appears to be a 200mm lens) in the February 1966 issue of National Geographic. This is the issue that reported her death in Viet Nam.

 

There's also a quote in the March 1966 issue of PopPhoto by Kyoichi Sawada (also killed in Nam) who called it "the workhorse of the war..if they ever develop it to the point where you can load it fast, and use longer lenses with it, it will become the basic camera of photojournalism".

 

Maybe Nikon should have looked into that development.

I agree with Charles and must strongly disagree with John on the quality of the 35 f2.5 Nikkor. I have a series of these lenses from rangefinder, then Nikonos 1 through to 5 in my collection. Its every bit a match for a pre asph summicron in any of the vintages that I have. Voigtlander / Cosina virtually replicated this lens for good reason! Nikons annual photo competition have an underwater section and exhibit some amaizing shots with this lens if you take a peek. The later multi coating ones are very flare resistant. Those divers who seem to experience flare alot occur from water droplets or that through diving they badly scratch the front glass protector. I also disagree with John on the Nikonos 4. Although aperture priority automatic it also has a mechanical release speed of 90th of a sec. Which permits limited manual exposure via the aperture.

<p>It'a an old thread, there are not many opinions on Nikonos V above water, so my reply: probably someone could be interested in the future...<br>

I am a Leica M and R user, I own a Spotmatic S-M-C system too, and I use mainly Kodak slides.<br>

Nikonos are camera I suggest to skilled people: you have to evaluate the distance...You have to use the finder for the 80... so I suggest to use if you like to work around...<br>

Camera is not as silent as a Leica M but better than a reflex: around a Leica CL...<br>

Meter system in very good: I have got a V model.<br>

Lenses:<br>

<strong>35mm</strong> Very flare prone. Please forget the original sunshade: is useless. I have adapt with great result an original (for 85mm?) nikkor lens shade that works great, so I suggest you. Compared to Leica or Takumar, there is no game: nikkor show low contrast and good but not so crisp details...an "average " quality lens ...however colors are very good: a simmetric lens design so colors are well corrected. A low contrast lens can be use in contrasty situations to balance the lights , and with a very good color rendition, nice shots are done. Nice shots in low light.<br>

<strong>80mm</strong> A very good lens, better than 35mm. Increase contrast, crisp details, and the color in the same league of the 35. Adapted the same sunshade of the 35.<br>

<strong>Overall: </strong>It is not the Nikon M of the cameras: however colors are nice (not like Leica but better than usual, let's say Zeiss) so with the right film for the situation you can have very good shoots.<br>

Hope it will help, regards Enrico.</p>