Nikon F100 Almost as Good as The F6

Discussion in 'Modern Film Cameras' started by Henricvs, Dec 25, 2018.

  1. I would like to see that. I would by a metal replacement.
  2. Whatever part you printed, you'd still need to attach it to the rest of the back, which is the tricky bit. For those of us without the required skills, I suppose the best thing would be to track down a local technician who is prepared to do something a bit out of the ordinary - fabricate the catch from sheet metal and secure it to the back, as the guy in Manila seems to have done. The photo on the Flickr thread isn't that clear, but would probably be enough for a skilled technician to work out how to do something similar. For now, I have a spare data back I managed to find at a good price. I was tempted to buy a parts body at a camera fair the other week, which was apparently trashed by battery corrosion but (unlike most of the broken F100 bodies you see on ebay) had an intact back.
    Henricvs likes this.
  3. I look for them all the time for the same reason. If I find a deal I will snatch it up. They are getting harder and harder to find cheap.
  4. F6 isnt a real one digit F as it lacks changeable viewfinders,
    F100 was known as poor mans F5
    so if you want the real thing go with F5^^
  5. Well, as the end of the line for one digit film cameras, perhaps the design team thought the changeable viewfinders unnecessary or even unpopular for the narrowing market of film photography. I wonder if Nikon figured that most professional photographers would be using digital for their business and their top of the line film camera would have a different market. The F5 was a poor man's F5 until the F6 showed up. :)
  6. I just keep buying F5's. I have three now and will add a 50th anniversary edition soon
    Henricvs likes this.
  7. IMO, interchangeable finders really were a legacy from the F/F2 era where the finder contained the "brains" of the meter(or lack thereof).

    The F3 did allow you to choose between either a high magnification, low eyepoint finder or a high eyepoint finder with lower magnification. It's a choice I appreciate having, although ultimately I sold my F3HP and kept the low eyepoint version(despite wearing glasses, I appreciate the bigger and brighter LP image). By the F4 and F5 era, you handicap the camera in various ways using anything other than the standard eyelevel finder.

    I know that for some folks, something like a chimney finder or action finder is very useful. I'm not one of those people-occasionally I do appreciate a waste level, in which case I'll use an F or F2. I can see myself using a chimney for macro work, but don't have one-I'm not sure whether I should go for an F2 so that I can use one of the special macro focusing screens, or an F3 so that I can get metering.

    I have seen arguments that an interchangeable finder makes changing focus screens easy. This is certainly true, and I appreciate it on Fs and F2s where I have a bunch of special purpose screens. As cameras have become more advanced, the selection of alternative screens has become somewhat limited. I would love a K or L for the F4, but they are all but impossible to find. My F5 actually came with an L, and I ended up buying a standard screen since the L "hides" the center focus point and I use my F5 almost exclusively with AF lenses. Many folks will like a grid screen(E), but if you want one for your F6 you'll likely only change it once and honestly doing it through the mirror box isn't a huge deal.

    I like the F5, and I guess I can claim to have two of them(although one doesn't actually have a place where you can even put a roll of film :) , even though it says Nikon and F5 on the front, and can use F5 accessories like finders and screens). If I needed-and had-the additional finders for it I'd use it.

    Aside from that, I'd argue that Nikon's single digit cameras are more about build quality, and increasingly about things like weather sealing. The F6 is a much more solid camera than the F100 or really any other consumer camera. Not that the much loved FM/FE series cameras are exactly fragile, but you can feel a difference in build quality between them and their contemporary pro cameras, and the same is true of the F6. The F6 is more-or-less a digital D2, and things like weather sealing are every bit up to the same standard as those cameras.
    dennisbrown and Henricvs like this.
  8. They are certainly affordable! You would be crazy not to buy bunches of them! They are great cameras and the last of their breed.
    Dave Luttmann likes this.
  9. I think that Nikon might just possibly have noticed that Canon was doing just fine with its EOS-1 and its non-interchangeable finder. Seems like the pros who were using the EOS-1/n/v never missed this feature.

    Me personally, I'm an old atavistic anachronism. I like interchangeable finders. I actually own two accessory finders for my original Canon F-1s and two for my Nikon F2s. Replacing focusing screens through the mirror box is a fiddly affair and something that isn't easily done while out in the field (I do mostly outdoor photography), whereas dropping in another focusing screen is much easier to do.
  10. Has anyone's F5 or F6 ever had sticky rubber? My F100 is slightly tacky (not worse than my maxxum 7), but still kinda annoys me
  11. Don't have a F5 and my F6 is new so not yet. Most, if not all of my other Nikon SLR's got sticky. I found the easiest solution was a combination of rubbing alcohol and Armor All. First get as much off with a alcohol damp cloth. Once you feel you got most of it off, use the Armor All. Again, put it on a cloth and DON"T spray or pour it on your camera. That worked for me.
  12. My F6 is a low-ish serial number, so I'd guess it to be probably 2004-2010 production(although I'm not sure if there's any real data correlating SNs to production date). That means it's potentially close to 15 years old. The rubber shows no sign of stickiness. I have no idea when my F5 was made, but it's also is not at all sticky, nor is my Kodak DCS620(which didn't even bother with removing the F5 badging from the body when Kodak put digital guts in it).

    I've also not seen sticky rubber on any D1 or D2 series cameras-I have a whole pile of D1s, D1Hs, and a D1X, along with a D2H, D2X, and D2Xs.

    It seems to me that there are two things going on-first Nikon seems to have used better rubber on their single digit cameras, and also they seem to have mostly fixed the problem that plagued a lot of 90s cameras. To the first point, as I mentioned I've not seen an F5 with sticky rubber, nor have I seen an F4 with it. By contrast, finding an N90 without it is seemingly impossible, and the N80 doesn't seem much better. The F100 at least isn't as bad as the N90-I know my N90 is pretty well permanently branded as belonging to me because it has my fingerprints basically molded in to it.
    Henricvs likes this.
  13. I don't know how old my F100 is, but it is showing no signs of the sticky rubber syndrome yet. Now, my N80 on the other hand -- it was a sticky mess when I bought it. A mess, because all sorts of stuff stuck to it. Took me a while to clean off all the gunk. To take care of the stickiness, I used talcum powder. I lightly dusted my hands with it, then just "handled" the camera thoroughly. The talc becomes translucent, so you don't see it. That was a few years ago, and the stickiness hasn't returned.
    Henricvs likes this.

Share This Page