Nikon N6000

I was digging around in my old Nikon literature and remembered the N6000, a very odd bird from the early '90s. Two main details are that it was basically an N6006 without AF or built-in flash (N6006 was an AF body that was selling new for ~$400 into the late '90s in case anyone is wondering).

 

Anyone have any experience with an N6000/F601M? It seems to have been a strange continuation of the N2000/F301 that amounted to a motor-driven MF camera. eBay listings claim that it's "RARE!" which I don't doubt.

 

Eric Sande

 

A manual-focus camera that works best with AF lenses (or more precisely, lenses with a chip (of which there weren't many non-AF ones in those days). In terms of available metering modes, a step back from the N2000/F-301. At some point I was thinking about getting one - can't recall what turned me away in the end.

Was it the Olympus OM-88 that had "power-Focus"? Had a wheel that you turned by hand to focus the AF lens. The body did not have autofocus.

The N6000 is not as bad as that, but seemed just for people that hated autofocus. I got one in a box of cameras, gave it away. These days- the viewfinder in the N8008s is much nicer than the N6006/N6000. These cameras go for $20 and under.

 

https://www.olympusamerica.com/files/oima_cckb/Oly_OM88.pdf

 

Yep. OM-88. Truly Stupid.

Interesting-seems like a continuation of the N2000/N2020 pairing.

 

I'll go hunting for one, although I'm certainly not paying big bucks for it!

N6000 bodies do not fetch a premium price - definitely under US$30 on eBay.

 

I've enjoyed picking up some old Nikon AF film bodies over the years just to see what they are like, but have avoided the ones with almost proprietary batteries. The N6000/6006 bodies require a chunky 6V lithium battery. I haven't looked it up but I wonder if it s still readily available. The N70 I bought in 1997 is the only AF body I currently have that requires a special battery (CR123). Everything else is AA.

N6000 bodies do not fetch a premium price - definitely under US$30 on eBay.

 

I've enjoyed picking up some old Nikon AF film bodies over the years just to see what they are like, but have avoided the ones with almost proprietary batteries. The N6000/6006 bodies require a chunky 6V lithium battery. I haven't looked it up but I wonder if it s still readily available. The N70 I bought in 1997 is the only AF body I currently have that requires a special battery (CR123). Everything else is AA.

 

Good to know-I'll have to head over.

 

It sounds like maybe it was a direct competitor for the Canon EOS camera whose name escapes me but that was purely manual focus and worked with EOS lenses.

 

The 2CR123 battery(the one in the little plastic holder) is still available with some hunting. I've even seen them in drug stores locally, although you can pay half as much as the camera is worth for one. I've used an N6006 by putting two CR123s in and shoving a big piece of aluminum foil under the battery door to bridge them. It's ugly but works. I have a couple of well liked cameras, including my F6, that take CR123s, and they can be bought inexpensively in bulk.

 

In general, though, I think anyone looking at an N6006 these days would probably be better served by the N8008. It's bigger and heavier, but is a much nicer overall camera with a big bright high eyepoint finder similar to the N90 and F100. It also runs on AA batteries.

I have a couple N8008s bodies - also dirt cheap these days. I like them better than my N90s as far as ergonomics.

Of course we're looking at this from a perspective of these cameras being 20-30 years old(if not older) and I didn't use any of them(other than the F6) when they were still current products.

 

Still, though, I've never quite taken to the N90 either. It's always felt loud and rattly to me, and it seems to add weight vs. the N8008 without really adding appreciably more features(aside from the big one of AF-S compatibility). The F100 is a different story, and IMO the best film camera of the AF step-down pro bodies.

It was the F-601M outside the US. Weird duck.

Has this forum suddenly become a branch of APUG?

Why are we discussing Nikon's ancient mistakes that are better forgotten?

Canon did something similar with the manual focus EOS EF-M.

I was also surprised when I saw one for sale a few months ago. I didn’t know it existed.

The sample I saw wasn’t priced as a collectible but around the price of a used F601.

I think I understand the logic of it’s existence. If it had provisions for manual focusing, I think it would be a good successor to the F301 as an automated alternative to the FM2.

Has this forum suddenly become a branch of APUG?

Why are we discussing Nikon's ancient mistakes that are better forgotten?

 

This forum long predates mainstream digital photography. I don't see why talking about film bodies, gear, chemistry, processes, etc. is in the least bit off-topic.

This forum long predates mainstream digital photography. I don't see why talking about film bodies, gear, chemistry, processes, etc. is in the least bit off-topic.

 

I can't prove it with any data but the Nikon forum and photo.net in general used to have a lot more traffic 15-20+ years ago. Any time I'd check in there were new posts about gear and people were happy to engage. As the internet has aged it seems this is not the go-to place for info but I still like talking about film gear.

 

I could always start a thread about corrupted images on a CF card - those are always fun and informative!

 

Eric Sande

Eric, things have changed but many of us are still here and try to be as active and helpful as possible.

Everything about photography has changed in the last 15-20 years. Most of the good printed magazines have disappeared (Outdoor Photographer in the US and Photo Life in Canada still publish, but all the other ones I used to subscribe to have disappeared). I even used to hang out at my local camera store on Saturdays a lot of weekends. I spent quite a bit of money there buying film and photographic paper and chemistry, and dropping off and picking up colour film for processing. Digital changed a lot of that because once you got the gear, you really didn't need to go anywhere to do anything with the images.

 

But film is still here. And there are still darkrooms. And while I shot a lot of film there, my D800 got a lot of use on a trip to a national park week before last. Strangely, though, the camera I had the most fun with there wasn't my D800 or either of my F4 bodies - it was my Olympus Stylus Epic!

 

We've drifted dangerously off topic... this might warrant a new thread if people feel so inclined.

I could always start a thread about corrupted images on a CF card

Could be a very short thread!

Why are we discussing Nikon's ancient mistakes that are better forgotten?

 

Right! If we ignore or burn the old books, problems will all go away. As I understand, that has worked well from Qin Shi Huang to Fahrenheit 451.

 

There are some, even outside the classic camera forum, that actually like old cameras.o_O

'Bebelplatz' famous for 10 May 1933

Right! If we ignore or burn the old books, problems will all go away.

Ah, that's already happened.

In the space of about 20 years I've watched the Internet change from a new Library of Alexandria, where hard information could be found on any subject, to a tawdry shopping mall full of hype and misinformation.

 

And comparing old cameras to books is just stupid. You can learn nothing from an old camera, except maybe that you're a bit of a Luddite.

And comparing old cameras to books is just stupid. You can learn nothing from an old camera

 

and it's stupid not to realize that the discussion is not about things, but about information/knowledge in all of these cases.

and it's stupid not to realize that the discussion is not about things, but about information/knowledge in all of these cases.

Ah, come on; live and let live. Rodeo Joe puts his grumpy-old-man cowboy hat on from time to time, you know that - best ignored ;-)

Ah, come on; live and let live. Rodeo Joe puts his grumpy-old-man cowboy hat on from time to time, you know that - best ignored

 

Really! ???

It’s kind of funny. I’ve had at least one of most of the cameras mentioned and still have and use older film bodies dated before and after AF showed up for real. I still like to use the F, F2, F4s and a few others. Why? Because it’s fun and if you aren’t having fun why are you bothering?

 

Rick H.

I had one back in the late 90's and used it and a AF 50 f/1.8 (non-D) in a photography class I was taking. I also had the N6006 purchased in the early 90's, it was my first AF Nikon body. I traded both of them for a F4s.

Because it’s fun and if you aren’t having fun why are you bothering?

I don't think Francis Bacon or Dorothea Lange or Don McCullin looked as if they were having much 'fun' while creating their images.

 

"...and it's stupid not to realize that the discussion is not about things, but about information/knowledge in all of these cases."

 

The medium is not the message!