Death of the F mount

Well, good luck making your own 35mm film when that goes out of production!

 

Nonsense. Not likely to be a problem. You can still buy buggy whips and oil paints.

I have never seen this, so just checked the 2nd hand prices! Is it made of gold? :)

 

It was state of the art in the late 1950's. And Nikon reused a lot of the parts for the Nikon F, so getting a titanium replacement shutter isn't difficult. Then again, they never seem to fail.

 

Nikon Rangefinder SP

That is exactly what happened with 70mm film for the Hasselblad.

The Hasselbad requires a certain type of 70mm sprocket film, that no one makes anymore, so the 70mm gear is not usable. And the last time I looked, the 70mm stuff was very cheap on eBay.

 

Formats, such as 127, die out. But 127 was never even close to the popularity of 35mm and 120 formats. I'll take my chances because I enjoy printing in a traditional darkroom. The rest of you can wring your hands and worry that the end of the world is near.

Save your outdated and fogged 100' rolls. Someday, when 35mm film is no longer available, you'll be able to strip them with bleach and recoat them with homebrew emulsion. Making emulsion is a lot easier than making a perf punch for the stock.

 

That is exactly what happened with 70mm film for the Hasselblad.

The Hasselbad requires a certain type of 70mm sprocket film, that no one makes anymore, so the 70mm gear is not usable. And the last time I looked, the 70mm stuff was very cheap on eBay.

I dunno, there were an awful LOT of Instamatics when I was growing up. A lot of people dropped the roll film and 35mm cameras for the drop-in ease of use of the 126 cartridge.

However, the film is gone (at least I don't know anyone still making it), and probably most of the negatives are long lost.

 

As for printing, I have enlargers waiting for me to build my darkroom.

I find it more relaxing to print in a wet darkroom.

But for getting things done, the computer beats the darkroom.

The advantage of the computer is that it can do many many other tasks besides digital image processing. I had my chemical wet darkroom when I was a teenager in high school, but I haven't touched any of that since I was an undergrad, and that was many years before digital photography became popular some 20 or so years ago. I bought my first DSLR, a D100, back in 2002.

 

I see my DSLRs will continue to function for years to come. The two I use the most, the D5 and D500, are both 5 years old. Maybe mirrorless will replace them some day, perhaps within a year. But they can continue to work fine for a few more years. Unlike the dependency on film, as long as your batteries and memory cards are fine, you can continue to use your DSLRs. My mirrorless Z6 and Z6 ii use the same types of batteries and memory cards as the D500. There is no issue there so far. However, I wouldn't expect Nikon to introduce another F-mount body or lens, and even if they do, I am not interested.

and even if they do, I am not interested.

I sold my 70-200mm VRii for being a bit soft at the long end, but like the range.

 

The options i have are the last fl e version or the Z version.

 

I still use my D850 and D500 lots.... and I have a Z6ii.

 

I guess I get the F mount and/but use the FTZ.

The options i have are the last fl e version or the Z version.

 

Or the Tamron or the Sigma, One big advantage the F-mount has is that there are many excellent third party lenses available. Case in point, look at some of the wildlife images Bill Boyd took with the Tamron 150-600 on his D850; he posts in the Nature and Nikon Wednesday threads.

or the Sigma

Tried that and the AF wasn't always fast or consistent enough.

Sometimes AF just failed...period.

I think film will be around for a long time. I don't think the renewed interest is a fad but rather a trend, although it will probably be a specialty item. Think about recovering an image from a 50 year old negative versus a 50 year old computer file. Vinyl is outselling compact discs now. Not all technology disappears because a new or better on exists.

Or the Tamron or the Sigma, . . .

 

I tried both.

Sigma drove me nuts. The Sigma zoom ring turns in the opposite direction than the Nikon zoom ring. :confused:

If you shoot action and zoom with muscle memory, it get confusing and frustrating, when you keep turning the zoom ring the wrong way. I gave up in frustration after 15 minutes.

But, if not fast action, then turning the zoom ring the wrong way only cost a little more time, not a lost shot.

 

The Tamron zoom ring turns in the same direction as the Nikon zoom ring. :)

 

So Sigma for Canon, and Tamron for Nikon.

Tried that and the AF wasn't always fast or consistent enough.

Sometimes AF just failed...period.

So try the Tamron. I like my Tamron 70-200 on my D750. The AF is just fine. When it misses, it is usually me,

I think it's the Sigma reverse engineering of the Nikon AF.... and fast moving action.

I have no problem with the ring direction, but the focusing right past/through a very obvious BIF, repeatedly, got a bit tiresome. I tried all of the AF modes, but initial lock was a real issue for it.

Usually, I'd suspect me being the problem, but I never had AF issues with the previous VRii, just a bit soft wide open at the long end.

Up to 135mm is was stellar, but my shooting sometimes needed the extra reach. I resorted to cropping rather than use the glass.

There are some very good grey deals for the last (!) F mount FL E version.

Supposedly the Z version is a tiny bit better, but it won't fit my D500 or D850...;)

Vinyl is outselling compact discs now. Not all technology disappears because a new or better on exists.

Or rather MP3 downloads are outselling both CDs and LPs by a huge margin. And how easy is it to buy sensitised glass plates? Gun cotton and ether to coat your own wet plates? Mercury and silver coated metal plates for your Daguerreotypes?

 

Sure, you can't buy 3.5" floppy disks or Smartmedia cards anymore, but nothing lasts forever. Otherwise we'd still be using flint tools and living in caves.

If and when Nikon and other manufacturers decide to stop making F mount lenses the F mount cameras and all the lenses that are out and about will not disappear in a big hurry. The "death of the F mount" is something that will happen much later, if at all.

 

Musings about horse carts, CDs etc. serve little purpose, because almost none of those ancient things have ever disappeared, and there is no telling what of the things around today will really 'die' and disappear.

Things change, yes. Film, for instance, is still available, but its position on the market has changed quite a bit. Who knows where it will be in 20 years from now? Rodeo Person holds strong opinions, but can predict the future as much as he can appreciate the current situation, i.e. not very well.

With music, the distribution channels changed; this happened also with photography when photographers moved from film to digital and publication partly moved from paper to online publishing. With film the process is very different from that of digital and the disappearance of processing labs and the time and cost of transferring the images to the digital domain made it difficult to use in a time- and cost-effective manner, thus the use of film cameras diminished. On the other hand, DSLRs and mirrorless cameras use the same media, same software tools, same distribution channels for the images, thus there is no reason a person cannot use DSLRs as long as they like and the cameras are operational. Some use film for effect, some use it to avoid having to do digital processing, and some for just playing around, but the extra costs would be hard to put on a customer's bill, and generally better quality can be achieved easier with digital. The difference between DSLRs and mirrorless is rather a minor one and the workflow is the same. The choice boils down to costs (of purchasing new equipment) and personal preferences (EVF vs. OVF; availability of certain features). It's a bit like the difference between manual and automatic transmission (which only affects the driving experience) rather than a large fundamental one between cars that use fossil fuels vs. electric cars where again the distribution network has to change.

I guess to many something is death if they are no longer made and I do think Nikon will stop making the F mount lenses in the future.

That may be. And from then on noone can use F mount cameras and lenses anymore, because they get disgustingly soft and smelly.

With music, the distribution channels changed; this happened also with photography when photographers moved from film to digital and publication partly moved from paper to online publishing. With film the process is very different from that of digital and the disappearance of processing labs and the time and cost of transferring the images to the digital domain made it difficult to use in a time- and cost-effective manner, thus the use of film cameras diminished. On the other hand, DSLRs and mirrorless cameras use the same media, same software tools, same distribution channels for the images, thus there is no reason a person cannot use DSLRs as long as they like and the cameras are operational. Some use film for effect, some use it to avoid having to do digital processing, and some for just playing around, but the extra costs would be hard to put on a customer's bill, and generally better quality can be achieved easier with digital. The difference between DSLRs and mirrorless is rather a minor one and the workflow is the same. The choice boils down to costs (of purchasing new equipment) and personal preferences (EVF vs. OVF; availability of certain features). It's a bit like the difference between manual and automatic transmission (which only affects the driving experience) rather than a large fundamental one between cars that use fossil fuels vs. electric cars where again the distribution network has to change.

I guess to many something is death if they are no longer made and I do think Nikon will stop making the F mount lenses in the future.

That may be. And from then on noone can use F mount cameras and lenses anymore, because they get disgustingly soft and smelly.

Which is definitely not true but it's true that many people consider if manufacturers stop making something it's dead. Not me though.

That may be. And from then on noone can use F mount cameras and lenses anymore, because they get disgustingly soft and smelly.

 

Is that the users or the F mount cameras and lenses??

 

:p

Edited June 18, 2021 by mike_halliwell

Rodeo Person holds strong opinions, but can predict the future as much as he can appreciate the current situation, i.e. not very well.

There we go with the childish personal insults again!

 

Carry on q.g. With any luck it'll get you removed from the fora, and your mainly useless input along with you.

I think the old Vinyl v Digital analogy is very similar to the modern ultra sharp Sigma Art lenses v the old AI lenses idea.

Some prefer the character of Vinyl and AI lenses.

The fact that it is audio and optical flaws that make that character, is an irrelevance.

It's very much a personal preference.

So far the Z lenses are optically superior to their F mount equivalents.

Interestingly, I haven't read many 'soulless' descriptions of them. Maybe they've found a sweet spot?

There we go with the childish personal insults again!

 

Carry on q.g. With any luck it'll get you removed from the fora, and your mainly useless input along with you.

Yes, there we go. In your frequently expressed opinion most people are deluded and need to move with the times. Your strong opinion is not capable of acknowledging that things aren't going quite the way you think.

As you have demonstrated in this thread once again. You are wrong, Rodeo Person. You constantly think that because you have a particular opinion about anything, it must be shared by everyone as a factual believe. Or else... in this thread those who don't agree with you are at the level of cavemen.

Edited June 19, 2021 by q.g._de_bakker

Camera companies just trying to force an upgrade, or not as much of upgrade, as just costly switch, new camera, new lenses.

All I personally want, is simple camera without video, with really good AF, old style dials and short menu, with reasonable price, also nice set of 2.8 affordable primes.

Can they do it? Yes, but it's not gonna happen.:(

All I personally want, is simple camera without video, with really good AF, old style dials and short menu, with reasonable price,

2nd hand Df?