Nikon F questions

Hi Everyone,

I recently picked up this very beautiful Nikon F.

The meter coupling prong on the lens, I believe is the first style that Nikon came out with. When I mount the lens, the coupling doesn't engage the pin on the Ftn finder, even when I turn the aperture ring to each end (Nikon shuffle). I have some Ai-s lenses that engage the pin just fine. I'm wondering if there's something I'm doing wrong? I was thinking about changing the prong to the more rounded style.

The other question is more to satisfy my curiosity. I understand the Nikon F was manufactured until 1974 and the F2 was introduced in 1970. During that four year overlap why would anyone buy an F when the F2 was superior in every way?

If I remember correctly, you have to center the pin on the meter by hand before you mount the lens. Just give it a gentle push with your finger. Then set the lens to any aperture between f/5.6 and maximum (widest) aperture. Mount the lens, then slowly rotate the aperture ring to stop down the lens (make the aperture smaller say f/16). The coupling prong on the lens will couple with the centered pin on the finder. After it is coupled, rotate the aperture ring on the lens between maximum and minimum aperture to set the meter,

Enjoy your FTn. I had mine for over 30 years until it was stolen. I miss that camera.

If your hand is used to handling the F, and you have other Fs, then adding a different handling F2 to the mix will confuse your hand.

Example, to change film, on the F the base plate and back removes as a unit, on the F2 the back swings. Muscle memory is important when you change film quickly, and different handling is not good.

Is the front of the prism seated and locked?

If the front is up, the lens may not couple to the meter pin on the prism.

If I remember correctly, you have to center the pin on the meter by hand before you mount the lens. J

With this lens I do. My other lenses that have the rounded meter prong I can just mount, then rotate the aperture ring and that causes the pin to engage.

Is the front of the prism seated and locked?

If the front is up, the lens may not couple to the meter pin on the prism.

Yes, seated and locked.

The other question is more to satisfy my curiosity. I understand the Nikon F was manufactured until 1974 and the F2 was introduced in 1970. During that four year overlap why would anyone buy an F when the F2 was superior in every way?

According to Nikon (https://imaging.nikon.com/history/) in the period from 1959 to 1968, Nikon had sold 300.000 Nikon F units, a number which only represented 1/3 of their entire Nikon F inventory! There must have been a huge Nikon F inventory left in 1970 when the F2 started to sell.

I can only imagine Nikon F was sold at a lower price compared to F2, thus appealing to a different customer segment.

According to Nikon (https://imaging.nikon.com/history/) in the period from 1959 to 1968, Nikon had sold 300.000 Nikon F units, a number which only represented 1/3 of their entire Nikon F inventory! There must have been a huge Nikon F inventory left in 1970 when the F2 started to sell.

I can only imagine Nikon F was sold at a lower price compared to F2, thus appealing to a different customer segment.

Interesting!

I understand the Nikon F was manufactured until 1974 and the F2 was introduced in 1970. During that four year overlap why would anyone buy an F when the F2 was superior in every way?

I don't know what you mean by "superior in every way". I have a late Nikon F and an early Nikon F2 and have always found them to pretty much interchangable.

At the time, many people would have quarreled with the assertion that the F was vastly inferior to the new F2.

I have both, and both are wonderful cameras. The F is especially nice without the Photomic head. The F2 metering head is much better, if not perfect.

I don't know what you mean by "superior in every way". I have a late Nikon F and an early Nikon F2 and have always found them to pretty much interchangable.

Yes, they are both great cameras but it seems to me that the F2 took everything good about the F and made it great!

F2 improvements over the F:

• 1/2000 max shutter speed
  
• Film door that swings open rather than removable plate
  
• Mirror lockup design that doesn't waste a frame
  
• Ability to add motor drive without special modification to the camera
  
• motorized rewind with MD-1 and MD-2
  
• Smaller Photomic metering finders
  
• self-timer with delay time markings
  
• Slightly faster flash sync 1/90
  

Probably a few more that I can't think of at the moment.

If I was in the market for one of these cameras in the early 70's and had to choose one, it would be the F2 hand down! that's why I'm curious why someone would have chosen to buy a new F instead of a new F2 during the time they were being simultaneously manufactured?

This is me in 1970. I wasn't in the market for either camera at the time! lol! :)

The FTN, which your example has, is generally fairly reliable about indexing. As mentioned, it can be helpful to push in on the coupling pin before mounting the lens. You should hear a springy clicking sound, which indicates that the mechanism has been "reset" to center. When you twiddle the aperture ring, you should hear several more clicks as you turn it to the maximum aperture the first time.

The earlier Photomic heads that lack the semi-auto indexing of the FTN can be a bit more temperamental. Nearly all of them have a "gummy" follower. As the pin moves across the front of the finder, it needs to move up down so as to follow the aperture ring correctly. There is curved rod inside the head that guides this, but also a spring to push the pin down and keep it in contact. Old grease will keep the pin from going down(or at least slow it) and cause it to come out of the index. I take these apart, clean out the old grease, and regrease with watch mainspring grease(Moebius 8200). I've owned half a dozen FTNs and even more of the mechanically very similar F2 Photomic and have never needed to service the follower mechanism.

As for the F vs. F2-I have bunches of Fs and like using them, but to me the F2 feels a lot more "polished" than the F. A lot of the difference probably comes down to what you're used to. One of the most noticeable ergonomic differences is in the location of the shutter release, with F having it at the back of the camera like older Leicas and other rangefinders, while the F2 is toward the front as is typical of most other SLRs designed in the last ~50 years. I much prefer hinged back on the F2 to the removable one on the F, as I don't need to find a place to set the back down or use an awkward two finger hold to keep track of the back.

There are ways that the F is subjectively "better". A prime example I can think of for an early 70s photographer would be their type of flash use, if any. The F2 does sync slightly faster(1/90 vs 1/60) but only offers X sync. It's not inconceivable to think that an early to mid 70s photographer might have wanted to continue using bulbs, and the F offers a lot of sync versatility for different types of bulbs. You can easily use a slow burning FP type bulb with an F to sync at fast shutter speeds or a fast peak type bulb to stop action and/or make use of all the light it throws out, while if you want to use bulbs with an F2 pretty much your only choice is to use a fast peak bulb at something below the sync speed and hope for the best.

The F stop on the lens s/b set at f 5.6 before mounting

That's a Nikkormat thing(it will never engage unless you set it to f/5.6).

All the F and F2 non-AI finders are fine with mounting at whatever aperture you want. The key with the semi-auto-indexing ones(F FTN, all the F2 non-AI) is to make sure the mechanism is reset by pushing up the coupling pin.

If you're not holding the aperture ring while mounting, it will generally end up at f/5.6 during the mounting process, but you don't have to start with it there.

BTW, I typed this post while sitting here playing with an F FTN and a Nikkor-N.C. 24mm f/2.8. My preferred walk around camera for a while now has been my F2SB, which is non-AI.

Also, you can absolutely be certain from the photo that the camera shown has an FTN finder. The little cut-out window is a dead give-away.

That's a Nikkormat thing(it will never engage unless you set it to f/5.6).

 

All the F and F2 non-AI finders are fine with mounting at whatever aperture you want. The key with the semi-auto-indexing ones(F FTN, all the F2 non-AI) is to make sure the mechanism is reset by pushing up the coupling pin.

 

If you're not holding the aperture ring while mounting, it will generally end up at f/5.6 during the mounting process, but you don't have to start with it there.

 

BTW, I typed this post while sitting here playing with an F FTN and a Nikkor-N.C. 24mm f/2.8. My preferred walk around camera for a while now has been my F2SB, which is non-AI.

 

Also, you can absolutely be certain from the photo that the camera shown has an FTN finder. The little cut-out window is a dead give-away.

Probably correct, but the way I learned on an F Photomic Tn was to set at 5.6, slide the meter pin to the left and mount. Always worked. I no longer have the camera - gave it back to the friend I bought it from since he bought it when serving in Viet Nam and it had greater sentimental value to him than to me. As to Nikkormat - my backup camera for a good many years was an FS - meterless, and therefore virtually eternal. Unfortunately, no longer have that either.

If I was in the market for one of these cameras in the early 70's and had to choose one, it would be the F2 hand down! that's why I'm curious why someone would have chosen to buy a new F instead of a new F2 during the time they were being simultaneously manufactured?

OK, so I did a little research to satisfy your curiosity ;)

Early 70's pricing for a Chrome Nikon F body w FTN was $310 and a Chrome Nikon F2 body with Photomic was $555. Corrected for inflation, that would be $1920 versus $3530.

I guess this is the reason.

Believe JDM posted this.

There's less difference between the Nikon F body and the Nikkormat body than I would have expected - 220 vs 183 - given that the Nikkormat was supposed to be a budget model. I wonder if the Nikon F body price included a plain finder.

To be fair, you really have to compare the Nikon F w FTN finder against the Nikkormat. TTL light meters were high tech and costly at the time. Also, Nikon didn’t make SLR budget models until the EM was introduced around 1980.

Correction: I think Nikkorex was a budget model.

The early tabular and triangular forked pre-AI lenses sometimes have compatibility issues with the final Nikon F Photomic FTN and the F2 DP-1, DP-2, DP-3 meter prisms. Usually the problem is with the fork being too tall, so it conflicts with the prism pin and can't move past it to engage. Occasionally as in this case, the prong is a hair too short to engage the pin and just moves under it. The only cure is to replace the incompatible fork with a more modern one, or perhaps try raising it by layering a bit of tape underneath before screwing it back into the aperture ring. Or just use the stop down metering procedure when that lens is mounted (press the prism pin up with your finger until the it clicks and the indicator reads "5.6", press the depth of field preview to stop down the lens when you want to meter, and take your reading).

Re both F and F2 remaining in the active lineup between 1970 and 1974: several factors were in play. Yes, Nikon still had a backlog of F bodies to move, but there were other market forces. The F2 launch was delayed, and a bit rocky. The first year F2 batches had some serious issues which became widespread knowledge among pros, who avoided them and stocked up on the known-reliable F instead. At the time the F2 was introduced, nobody much cared abut the niceties of its design: all the target market was interested in was the new, vastly improved motor drive system. Since this was also delayed and had teething issues, pros sat on their hands and the F2 didn't really earn its stripes until around 1973, when 99% of body and motor issues had been corrected. Meanwhile, the global economy was chaotic and USA inflation was hammering imported goods like Japanese cameras. Initially the newly-produced F2 was dramatically more expensive than the pre-existing F stockpile, so the price advantage combined with the legendary reputation kept the F popular.

By 1974 prices had stabilized to where the F Photomic FTN was selling for only 25% less than the F2 Photomic, so Nikon slowly discontinued the original F as parts to build them ran out. Enough new Fs were left in the pipeline, however, that they continued to be promoted at retailers thru 1976. See price list below, taken from the Spring 1976 Consumers Guide (which hit newsstands November 1975). This quarterly review of photographic gear was an excellent source of unbiased info, being an advertiser-free publication. This issue had perhaps the most comprehensive review of the F2 I've ever seen, and a nearly as insightful review of the Olympus OM-1MD (which convinced me to choose it as my first serious camera). The "capsule review" section (below) is an entertaining read some 44 years later.

The early tabular and triangular forked pre-AI lenses sometimes have compatibility issues with the final Nikon F Photomic FTN and the F2 DP-1, DP-2, DP-3 meter prisms. Usually the problem is with the fork being too tall, so it conflicts with the prism pin and can't move past it to engage. Occasionally as in this case, the prong is a hair too short to engage the pin and just moves under it. The only cure is to replace the incompatible fork with a more modern one, or perhaps try raising it by layering a bit of tape underneath before screwing it back into the aperture ring. Or just use the stop down metering procedure when that lens is mounted (press the prism pin up with your finger until the it clicks and the indicator reads "5.6", press the depth of field preview to stop down the lens when you want to meter, and take your reading).

I think this is the case with mine, I wanted to make sure I wasn't doing something wrong. I think I'm going to replace the prong with one of these:

OK, so I did a little research to satisfy your curiosity ;)

Early 70's pricing for a Chrome Nikon F body w FTN was $310 and a Chrome Nikon F2 body with Photomic was $555. Corrected for inflation, that would be $1920 versus $3530.

I guess this is the reason.

That makes sense. The price list that Orsetto posted shows the F body with F36 cordless motor at $1015!

$7000 in today's money if you wanted a motor, wow!

The F36 honestly isn't AS terrible as lore has it, or at least that's my experience with admittedly a limited sample size(1).

The AA holder is a bit weird/awkward since it's not the whole length of the camera. Of course, there's also the fact that you can't swap them around like you can the ones for later cameras.

On the good side, too, I like that it's not as big/bulky as later motors, and I like the thumb release on it. A vertical release is one of my main reasons for using a release when I do, and the MD-1/MD-2 lacking them means that I rarely actually use the ones I have.

On the original question of getting the prong to engage, I had a small issue with one of my Photomic FTn's as the linkage became a little balky. When it's working right, although it retains the last lens's index value (or a faster one) until a new lens is put on and re-indexed, the prong should return to the central 5.6 position, ready to engage whenever there is no lens attached. When you are using an uncoupled lens, you push up on the prong, and the indexing pops down to 5.6, but the prong remains ready to re-engage the next coupled lens.

Old meters can get a little sluggish in the linkage, and might need a little limbering up or even lubricating.

The F36 honestly isn't AS terrible as lore has it, or at least that's my experience with admittedly a limited sample size(1).

Like the Nikon F itself, in some ways the motor drive was a victim of its own success.

Prior to the F, motor drives were pretty rare and exotic. Little by little, they fell into more common usage as the F became the 35mm standard, esp after third parties offered a cordless on-camera AA battery box. Nikon had stubbornly resisted this idea at first, offering only a clumsy heavy corded 8xC hip/shoulder battery pack. Once Nikon got a clue and started selling their weirdly Picasso-inspired AA battery grip in 1966, the motor really took off in popularity.

And that was the rub: the more popular the motor became, the more people discovered what a royal PITA it was to use compared to their expectations. If you didn't buy the motor together with an F body in a brand-new factory matched set, you faced an uphill battle. You needed to buy the motor plus a replacement motor-accessible internal baseplate, bring these and your existing F to a properly-trained technician, and have the motor + camera mechanically synchronized to each other. IOW, you typically can't buy a random used F36 motor and just slap it onto your existing F body. It might work for awhile, but often theres a sync clash and they won't work right unless you get them tuned into a matched pair (good luck finding a still-living tech who knows this arcane ritual).

That was irritating for pros who wanted to share a single expensive motor among several F bodies, but couldn't without risking reliability issues. Plus you had the aggravation of the clumsy combined motor/camera back. Plus if you wanted the 250 exposure long roll option, that required yet another redundant expensive motor with integrated camera back (limited to 250 use only). Underlying all of that, the motor+camera "sync" would drift periodically, requiring a tuneup. The original F36 motor drive was revised at least six times to reduce its dependency on "pairing", to little or no avail, and the F began to seem archaic. So you can well imagine, by 1969 pros were clamoring for a more logical, convenient motor system. Nikon couldn't really offer this with the now-obsolete rangefinder-based F architecture, so the F2 was conceived.

Unfortunately, initial runs of the F2 and MD1 were notorious for problems, throwing a wrench in the F to F2 torch passing. The F stuck around a couple years longer than planned, so wary pros could still buy a new Nikon camera that was vetted and trusted. Instead of being a momentous celebrated event, the F2 introduction was an unexpected black eye that tarnished Nikon's impeccable reputation up to that point. The F2 Photomic sold briskly to wealthy amateurs from the start, but didn't fully recover pro cred until all the bugs were known to be worked out in 1973 (around the time the MD2 replaced the MD1 and the overdue DP-2 meter turned up). Originally slated as a dedicated meter head that would only be sold as part of the DS-1 aperture control AE kit, Nikon took a Hail Mary pass and offered it as a secondary upmarket F2S body variation. The nifty lighted-arrows meter display soon became the dominant topic of F2 discussion, memories of its inelegant debut faded, and by 1974 it took the throne from its predecessor (becoming an icon in its own right, with legions of contented pros singing its praises).