Nikon F5 vs. the 100

[robert_j._basar]

If price was not a consideration, which of the two cameras would you buy and why? Is the RGB metering on the F5 considerably better than the metering on the 100?

[shun_cheung1]

If price isn't a consideration, I would definitely get the F5. Yes,

the RGB metering on the F5 is very advanced. I had a chance to talk to

David Middleton. He and John Shaw did a side by side comparison of the

F4 and F5, and the meter on the F5 is correct at a considerable higher

percentage of the time at some tricky situations. Moreover, the F5 has

a more durable body.

 

<p>

 

One advantage of the F100 is that it is a lighter camera, but what I

heard is that it'll be around US$1400, which is merely $500 below the

F5. IMO that is too small a price difference.

[e.ung___]

Hello Shun, people often say F5 metering is superior to others, but

in what mode(s)? Are they comparing the things in matrix, central

weighted or spot? Because matrix may not be very useful to somebody

like me. $5000 may not be a hugh price difference, but the weight and

appetite (battery concern) of F5 really makes it like a monster.

[geoffrey_s._kane3]

I don't konw if the RGB metering would be my main reason for prefering

the F5 to the F100; however, the 100% finder, full MLU, faster

advance, etc. clearly make the F5 a better camera. Besides, the F5

has been out for two years now, they've worked most of the bugs out

(battery issues, etc.) and it is clearly the flagship camera of

Nikon's line. The F100 does not compare to the F5 in the same way

that the N90 compared to the F4 (the N90 introduced "D" technology

and a clearly superior AF system). Except for some minor improvements

to the finder display, there are no real advances in the F100's

design --although it is superior to the N90s.

[robert_j._basar]

Thanks for your informative replies. I probably should have mentioned that I would be purchasing the camera primarily for nature and wildlife photography.

[geoffrey_s._kane3]

The weight differences between the two cameras may be an issue for

you. OTOH, if you plan on hiking through the wilderness with a large

telphoto and decent tripod, the weight differences between the F100

and the F5 might not really matter.<p>

If I wanted a really light weight rugged Nikon camera, I'd try to hunt

down an FM2T (fully manual SLR with in a titanium shell).

[stanley_chung]

I think most people get into this kind of dilemma because they don't

have any specific need for any of the models. In other words, they

often don't know what they need or want.

 

<p>

 

In my case, I would definitely get F100 over F5 (or even EOS 3) just

because it has WIDER-spread focusing points. I know this feature

will vastly improve one of MY major tasks.

 

<p>

 

The RGB meter of F5 is one of the "marketing strategy" feature that

makes a small difference in complex lighting/subject situations, but

if you "often" detect improvements because of this feature then you

should get F5. Yes, this can be determined only by YOUR experiments.

 

<p>

 

I'd like to recommend you to look for something more than the RGB

metering in the body selection. If you don't find out what you

really need, you'll never get satisfied with either one due to the

fact that F5 is the top-of-the-line, yet F100 is equipped with more

recent technologies.

 

<p>

 

Nikon never puts all the eggs in one basket 'cause they want you to

buy as many models as possible. Be a wise shopper.

[ivan_verschoote4]

Talking about price differences: in many European countries the price

difference between F5 and F 100 will be way over 1000 US$.

[shun_cheung1]

To answer Eric's question, David Middleton and John Shaw were

comparing the matrix metering modes between the F4 and F5. According

to Middleton, there is no difference between center weight or spot.

However, the matrix mode in the F5 is smart enough to adjust for some

situations such as snow on the ground, for example.

[danny_weber]

Stanley, the F100 and the F5 have the same AF sensor module and the

same spacing between sensors. The F100 looks to be a very nice addtion

to the Nikon line, but it contains no new technology compared to the

F5.

[robert_j._basar]

Danny,

The F5 has RGB matrix metering and the 100 does not. I just don't know how significant that difference is in the real world.

[anil___]

'IF' is one of the wonders of the world. We cannot live without IF.

I had a short affair with F5 (Just 36 exps) and almost fell in love

with it but for its price and weight. F100 with most of F5 features

and the same fast AF at affordable an price of around $1000 will

realy tempt me to buy one. I am using FM2N & F90x. AF of F90x has

its limitation when it comes to my latest passion of taking

photographs of motorsports.

 

<p>

 

IMHO IF there is no ceiling on price you could buy the equipment that

is needed for the job and to satisfy your ego and get access to some

places. I made the above statement because sometimes when I carry

F90x with MB10, 80-200 2.8 and SB26 immediate recognition as a

photograher is forced upon you by the crowd controllers.

[siegfried_boes]

How significant is the RGB meter? Guess it is nice feature.

However, seeing that no other camera has an RGB meter, it would

say more than 99% of the pictures you see are taken without

RGB meter, ... seems that it is not that important.

<p>

Or another argument, RGB metering gives you no new

opportunities, it's only doing a few things better or reliable.

<p>

I would not mind to have an RGB meter, but I never wanted to

carry a 1.4kg camera with 8 batteries, therefore the F100 is

more attractive to me. But I have a rather new F90X.

[don_kim2]

I like to have F5

As you see the price of F100 is about 1300$ plus we may have to buy

optional battery pack and data back -would cost 3-400$ more- would be

1500 to 1700$ total which is not that cheap then F5.

 

<p>

 

But what if all F100 package is under 1300$ sure I will go to F100

[stephen_willard]

I buy cameras to make money with. If a feature does not translate

into more revenue then I do not care about. The difference between

how much faster a lense focuses over another does prevent me from

taking photographs I can sell. I do not care if focusing is subsonic

or supersonic. Auto focusing technology in general is fast enough.

One thing that does make a difference is focus tracking. Focus

tracking has significantly increased my yeilds. I will not buy a

camera that does not have this feature. The RGB meter on my F5 makes

me money. My exposures are consistantly better then my competition.

My market share has increased because of my RGB metering system. I

will not buy a camera that does not duplicate or exceed the F5

exposure system. I was thinking about buying several F100s for

backup. I have decided instead to order two more F5 cameras.

[k_michael]

And the F100 is selling for $899 brand new. $600 used in excellent condition. What a difference 5 years makes? Mine is still going strong after 5 years. I'm glad I didn't get the F5. Matter of fact, I'm mainly a Fuji S2 man these days.