Nikon F2 vs. F3

[greg_seto]

This question just popped into my head. I searched google, and I

searched photo.net, but can't find a discussion along the lines of

the F2 versus the F3. I'm curious, and want to see what people have

to say about these warhorses pitted together.

[greg_seto]

I will cast my vote for the F2. The fully mechanical nature of it makes the F2 a much more reliable camera, for obvious reasons.

[Ed_Ingold]

The F3 is a durable, fully professional camera. Consider that it was manufactured continuously for over 20 years, through the production life of the F4 and nearly F5 combined. The ergonomics of the F2 is absolutely crude compared to the F3, from loading, to winding, to the location and feel of the shutter release. Exactly how is an electronic timer less reliable than a gear train? I've replaced the battery twice in the last 6 years.

[goemon]

OK, hands up everybody who has ever had their F3 fail on them in a way that an F2AS

would not also suffer? Or, for that matter, an F2 with a battery powered meter? Neither

one is a lightweight. Not motor drive issues, the F2 would

suffer the same. Remember that to be comparable, we're talking about an F3 and an F2AS,

otherwise you need to carry a separate meter, or put up with guessing. Actually the F3

should have an advantage here, because the shutter is electronically timed and so does

not need to be retuned periodically.

 

My take is that F2s are really neat and F3s are really neat, too. The F3 has some really

strange design issues like the LCD illumination button, some of the other controls are in

weird places, but apeture priority AE makes up for it, and as well you can get an F3HP.

The F2 is a mechanical jewel of a camera without enough features to have insane controls

for them. Both of them have that weird over-the-rewind-knob flash linkage. Which do I

own? Neither. I own an

FM3a and an MD-12 and do not spend a lot of time worrying about what happens if I play

basketball with the camera or whether the previous owner was some kind of crazy

photojournalist and almost burned the shutter out before it got handed to me.

 

Case in point, a third of the F2AS's that KEH is offering on their web page have broken

meters. No F3 has a broken meter. Is the F2AS less reliable, or just older? (I'm guessing

that it is mostly the latter, although clearly that meter is a weak point in the system)

 

This might come off as somewhat sharp. Really, I do like holding mechanical cameras and

shooting with mechanical cameras and there's something very satisfying about it, but I am

under no illusions that they are fundamentally more reliable than similarly well-built

electronic ones.

[Guest]

Well, I remember <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=005lLZ">this thread</a>, because I was wondering about the same thing at the time.<P>

I eventually got an F4... then sold it to go RF. But then I saw a <I>bargain</I> F2AS, and just had to have it. Broken metering head, but being fixed.<P>

The F3 doesn't add anything to the F2 that I need. I prefer the LED display of the DP-12 head for low light to the F3's LCD, plus the F2AS has all this fantastic architecture with elevated shutter speed dials and so on.<P>I still miss my old F4s: spot metering, metering scale in +/- 1/3EV, ergonomic grip, 1/8000s. If it had a wind lever, it would be better than an F2 or an F3... ;-)

[kelly_flanigan1]

If you started with the F; the F2 is an enhancement. You can use the same screens; same WL and 6X finder.

[jose_angel]

I`m not an F2 owner, but I used it in the past. I consider this camera the best of Nikon. It has its own personality and the greatest look . But the F2 is not for me. In the real world I need the little electronics of the F3. The F2 could have some electronics at the expense of size, weight and availability. The F3 electronic shutter is far more accurate, useful with longer exposures. I don`t need TTL all the time, but helped me in occasions. F3 motor drive is a wonder. I prefer the ergonomics of the F3 (little ergonomics).

 

For the times I like mechanical, I prefer to take the FM2n, lighter&smaller (and like the F2, with led meter). Perhaps the F2 was made for my previous generation (my olds still use F2), I feel more confortable with the F3.

 

It is my subjective opinion.

[christiaan_phleger___honol]

I just got my refurbished F2a back from Sover Wong (great service), and have begun

shooting with it. I've been a serious F3 user since 90 or so, and started using the F4 about

5-6 years ago (mostly for the flash). I have 4 F3s 2 F4s, F2a, Fm2n and Nikkormat, as well

as Leica, and I rotate them all. I think it is easier to go up than down. Like from a F3 to F4,

rather than F3 to F2.

 

I think the F line was changed along the lines of what shooters needed and wanted their

cameras to do, and to refine aspects of what the previous camera could do. Like when the

F2 was introduced, shooters needed a better back loading system from the F, and the F3

motor really was such a huge improvement over the F2s. The F4 improved the metering

info and flash.

 

But back to the question. I know for me, each has their own merits. F3s motor, AE and yes,

sheer like-a-hammer durablity. F2, really nice shutter feel, very fast winding without

motor, fewer interruptions from controls (like the F3 shutter lock, my F3P pin type lock is

much better).

 

So I use all of them, depending on the mood and shoot.

But I will tell you this. I got my F2 for the fact that it is a well made machine that can be

serviced to work. I do worry about the very long term ability to repair or replace some of

the F3 electronic parts. Yeah, I know they are tough, one of mine has like a quarter million

+ exposures on it, but, hey, Electronic Stuff Fails. Not all the time, but it does. Fixing it is

why I'll pick up a few more mechanical bodies.

 

And maybe an F6......

[lex_jenkins]

There are lots of similar discussions in the photo.net archives, Greg, but they're not easy to find.

 

Sometimes you can narrow things down by clicking on the "Nikon SLRs" section (1700+ entries to date) and using CTRL-F and a key word to find what you're looking for.

 

You'll find pretty much the same opinions in every one of these threads.

[james_ogara1]

If you want a MD, the MD-4 is light years ahead of the MD-2 or MD-3.

[james_lai]

Edward, are your F2 comments really about the F2? They seem to apply more to the F than the F2. As far as I know, the F2 loads just like the F3. I have no idea what you mean by the winding being crude, mine is as smooth as butter. The F2 shutter release position is in approximately the same location as on the F3, whereas the F had the shutter button closer to the back of the camera.

[charles_miller]

There are a couple more little items which haven't been mentioned in recent F2 versus F3 threads.

 

The F2 mirror reflects more light into the finder screen compared to the F3, because the F3 (and all later models) mirror is designed to leak some light through to the meter cell in the mirror box. The typical advantage with an F2 would be to use a bright aftermarket screen and a fast lens to be able to see and compose better in low light conditions.

 

When an F3 is in manual mode, it is only possible to change the shutter speed in whole stop increments. But with the F2, you can set the manual shutter speed to intermediate speeds between the detents, although this is sort of imprecise.

 

I vaguely remember that at one time Bjorn Rorslett said something to the effect that the F2 gives him the most accurate focusing with his macro lenses. But if that seems important, please check his site to confirm my recollection.

[gandicarter]

Both are solid, reliable cameras.

 

The major differences are the meter and the shutter timing. The F2 (if it isn't obvious by

now) having the meter in the pentaprism and the body is completely mechanical. The F3

has the meter at the bottom of the mirror box and has electronic timing. In 200 years luck

or real repair talent will be involved in a working F3, in 20 years either camera will still be

viable. My guess is that in 200 years there will be a small number of people who can keep

the F2 going -- probably without a working meter though.

 

The meter of the F3 means that different prisms/waistfinder (or even no finder at all) can

be used and a working meter is still available. This meter can also be used for TTL flash.

The combination of the meter and the electronic shutter provides an automatic exposure

(aperture priority) mode. (Shutter priority auto exposure equipment is available but rare

for the F2 -- for that matter auto focus equipment is available but rare for the F3)

 

Both cameras have excellent handling characteristics, the throw of the winder of the F3 is

a wee bit longer than the F2, but the lever is more comfortable to my thumb, so it's about

the same. The F3 is slightly easier to load than the F2 - it has many slots in the take-up

spool compared to only two in the F2. The F3 has a handy little lever for multiple

exposures that ensures the film absolutely doesn't move when you tension the shutter.

 

The range of shutter speeds is nearly indentical, but the F2 has to use the self-timer for

exposures longer than a second. The F2's self timer permits you to set the delay in a

range from 2 to 10 seconds whereas the F3 gives just 10 seconds. The F2's claim to glory

is its ability to set any speed you want once above 1/80. Set the dial between 1/250 and

1/500 and you get a shutter speed between those two click stops.

 

There are a few other little differences. The F3 has a built-in eyepiece shutter, because

auto exposure would need it, but such a thing isn't needed in the F2. The F2 screens can

be used in an F3 (they go in nicely but are difficult to remove) but F3 screens don't fit an

F2. The flash slides on in different directions and so are not compatible. The mirror lock-

up is much easier to operate on the F3. There is a bit of a grip on the F3 for your right

hand. The HP prism of the F3 is easier for wearers of glasses but the magnification is

slightly reduced.

 

Both cameras are legends and both deserve that standing.

 

Gerald

 

( http://www.suresoft.ca/homepage/gcarter.html )

[rick_helmke]

I've tried all of the top end Nikons through the F4s. I used F2's during my newspaper career and shot miles of film through two of them. They just ran and ran. I'd put new AA batteries in the motor drive every so often and a new meter battery about once a year. The F2 is, for me, the most durable Nikon ever made. It has an elegance in design that I always have enjoyed using. That plus the motor drive would allow me to change film rolls between plays at a college or pro football game. An F2 with an MD-2 is solid, reliable, noisy as hell, heavy, what more could you ask for?

 

The F3 never did anything for me. Nothing wrong with them, they are clearly well designed and built and run and run just like the F2. I just never did warm up to the thing. I've had two or three over the years and tried hard to make friends with them but the magic wasn't there.

 

I know there are many here who say the camera doesn't make any difference, it's all about the photographer, it's just a box to hold film and mount a lens etc. Nonsense. A good camera, like any well made and designed tool will contribute to the success of a photograph. Like wise a poor body can be at least partly responsible for the failure of one. If you disagree, ask a mechanic why he spends so much money on Snap-On, Mack or other pro-grade tools. There are cheaper alternatives. Any good tool is a pleasure to use and and you can count the F2 and F3 among the better examples.

 

Rick H.

[alan_wilder1]

Having owned an F2AS and and F3 in the past, I prefer the F2AS. Manual metering was far easier to use by virtue of it's three indicator lights(successful enough to be carried over through the FM2n), it's viewfinder readout visible in any light and also a provision for an external reading on top of the prism head. The shutter release was preferable in that you could actually sense by feel the exact trip point of it's release for your shot. Metering was also more sensitive in low light. The F3 had no mechanical sense just prior to the shutter going off due to it's electromechanical release. Batteries also went much further with the F2AS. The advantage of the F3 was size, weight, built in mini-grip, smoother film advance and improved shutter timing accuracy.

[dtmchan]

I own both before and sold both(F3HP,F2A and both with motors). I have FM/FM2/F70 now. After 14 years I brought F2A and a F2AS again. I was regreted to sold my F2A at first place but not F3HP. The reason is they are both solid and well built. I like the F2A/AS not the other NIKONs F?(F3/4/5/6 FM/E/A etc) is the viewfinder. The infomation of F2A/S are all display at the bottom of the viewfinder not F3 or FM/E/A or others. Your eye has to look up/down/left/right? to view all the information. I donot know why not many people talk about this feature. Only the newer Nikons show all the info at the bottom of the viewfinder such as F70/80/100, D100/D70.

[christiaan_phleger___honol]

Wow, what a well textured response from so many F2 and F3 shooters. I just wished I had

started shooting before the F3 was introduced, as I am just now getting into F2s. I do

remember the exact moment I saw the first F2 in use by someone who knew how to use it

so I guess that might have made an impression....

[loreneidahl]

Many people give opinions even though they dont own the products or have never used them side by side. How funny!

 

 

I currently own and use multiple versions of each the F2 and F3.

 

I use them with and without the motor drives. ( Md2/Md3 on the F2 and Md4 on the F3)

 

 

I prefer-------> both.

 

 

Finders:

 

I have 4 F3's, some have the HP finder some dont. I prefer the HP finder in general. I have two F2's each with different finders and a couple of spares. (one black and one chrome) I like the F3 finders better. On the F2 I prefer the AS finder.

 

The F2 does not have the HP finder that the F3 has. The F2 with a MD3 and battery pack attached is a huge camera that gets the job done. (bigger than my D2h with wireless adapter atached) The F3/MD4 combo is small in comparision.

 

I wear glasses, however I also have diopter correction lenses fitted to my finders. I still prefer the HP finder of the F3 for most shooting situations as I see the iamge more clearly. The Non HP finder is great for MF in dark with ultrafast lenses - like the 85 1.4 or 50 1.2.

 

When I need a relable film camera that does not require batteries to function - I grab the F2. - Always.

 

When I anticipate unusual lighting condtions I grap the F3 The F3 has a 80/20 metering pattern as compared to a 60/40 metering pattern of the f2. This difference is huge for the subjects that I shoot ( low light action with high contrast lighting) . The meter on the F2 (

pick one) can get fooled more easily than the F3's meter.

 

 

Screens:

 

I have the F3's and F2's fitted with different screens based on shooting needs. No preference as to quality as they are all good.

 

Viewfinder coverage:

 

Each covers 100% of the image. If a camera does not have this - it is crippled in my opinion. Some will argue that DOF is important , -true- however If I can see what the camera is seeing I am at a severe disadvantage as it relates to creating images.

 

DOF/Miror lockup:

 

Both have it. No problem. Better than the origianl F though. ( which I also have)

 

ASA coverage:

 

Both cover from 12 - 6400 . As I shoot in the upper ranges - this is important.

 

 

Meter:

 

The 80/20 CW on the F3 is more accurate in my type of lighting than the matrix meter on the N90s that I used to have. BTW the 80/20 CW metering pattern of the F3 is only available on the F3. It operates like a very fat spot on the camera and is very accurate for harsh lighting conditions that would fool matrix meters or traditional 60/40 CW meters found in the F2.

 

The F3 has the meter in the body. The F2 has the meter in its head. Subtle difference - but one that makes a huge difference for macro work or when using different finders as I do. It can also make a difference in how similar scenes are metered. ( found this out when I was testing out a newly CLA'ed F2 against a F3)

 

For example:

For long exposure Astro-photo shots - The F2 with a 6x finder wins hands down. The F2 requires no batteries and in AStro-photos the exposures are measured in hours not seconds.

 

For macro shots the F3 with the 6x finder wins hands down. None does it better.

 

Metering oddities of the F3 - not much more odd than the F2 - REALLY! It really depends upon your preferences. Some like match needle and some dont. Not a big deal as long as its accurate and fits how you work.

 

Some people complain that the F3 meter light is hard to operate or to see the readout. They apparently have not tried a F2 with a standard meter head attached - it does have a light at all. The only meter for the F2 that has a light is the AS version (dp-12) of the F2 and the head alone sells for about $350-$450 in good condition from KEH.

 

My F2AS light is not all that great. I would say that the quality of light from my F3HP meter light is equal to that of my F2AS meter light.

 

 

Flash:

 

Flash issues - both have the same need for a special adapter to use standard ISO flash foot. Both have a sync speed of 1/80 second.

 

I dont use a camera mounted flash so I dont care.

 

 

Weight:

 

Both have weight. I find that to be good. They wont blow away.

They work well with my long lenses, like the 300/f4 or the 300/f2.8 or the 200/f.2. The addition of the motor drives to either camera proveds a excellant counter balance to the the weight of the lens.

 

Due to my type of shooting a tripod can not be used nor can a monopod. As a result I need a stable camera/lens combo that is balanced properly. I even ADD weight to the camera to balance them. (Underdog batteries add excellant counter balance to the tripod mounts of the lenses. Not sure you can still get them though.)

 

And yes I shoot all day long, 8-12 hours with the cameras. (I am also using my D2h side by side the the F3 or F2.)

 

As a result my basic film kit consits of BOTH the F2 and the F3. I usaully have one version of each loaded with BW and Color film. So I bring the bodies that match my job. ( BW-F2 with Color-F3 or Color-F2 with BW-F3)

 

 

So I own both, use both, love both, dislike both for different reasons and will sell neither one !

 

Choose the right tool for the job and the job will be easy.

[lee_shively]

I have used the products side-by-side.

 

"OK, hands up everybody who has ever had their F3 fail on them in a way that an F2AS would not also suffer?"

 

I'm waving both hands in the air right now, if anyone cares to notice.

 

The most reliable, durable and all-around hockey-puck of a camera that I've ever used were Nikon F/FTn's. The F2 models were an ergonomic improvement that retained the reliability. The F3 eventually became accepted by press photographers but it was a pale shadow of the previous models.

 

The least reliable cameras I've ever used were the original F3 and FM. The FM could be forgiven for being somewhat unreliable--it was cheap and felt cheap compared to the F/F2 models. The F3 could not be forgiven--it was supposed to be a professional camera.

 

The F3 was improved as time went by. Reliability improved. I'm sure the later models worked fine. But the best combination of a reliable camera with good ergonomics was the F2 models.

[mark_chappell]

I owned both and used them heavily. Ergonomically, I preferred the F3 -- with or without

motor drive -- but there was a certain.... mechanical elegance to the F2 that I still find

appealing even though I rarely shoot film these days. My F3 failed twice (main circuit

board needed replacement and I think the same is true at present but I've not gotten it

fixed). My F2 NEVER failed. On the other hand, the F3 got a lot more use and abuse.

 

They're both very fine cameras but I guess overall I'm fonder of the '2'. I think the F2 was

the peak of sophistication and functionality of all-mechanical SLRs and just for that I'll

probably keep mine as a momento of

a bygone era.

[kelly_flanigan1]

Re <I> For long exposure Astro-photo shots - The F2 with a 6x finder wins hands down. </i><BR><BR>The 6x finder came out with the Nikon F; then was available also for the later F2. Here I have used them on both the F and F2 in astronomy. It has been wrongly stated on Photo.net that the 6x finder came begining with the F2. It was widely used in scientific usage with the Nikon F; and is in the older Nikon Nikkormat handbook versions; that existed before the F2 was even born.

[john falkenstine]

I have owned an F2 with the Photomic head for some 2 months now. A metering issue arose, but I found it wasn't the head but poor battery contact. I found the camera in a showcase in a local camera store for sale, and worked the price down. There isn't even a scratch or mar on the bottom of the unit. an excellent 50mm lens was bought at a local thrift store for about 10 bucks. A terrific "like new" wide angle came off E bay for about 35 bucks including shipping. The whole rig is heavy which is great for stability. Sounds great, looks great, pictures are great. I am satisfied.

[dritan_seda]

The king is Nikon F and not F2 or F3. THey were improvments not revolutions. Long live NIKON F.

[larry_miller5]

<p>IMHO, the F2 first, then the F3.</p>

[Albins images]

<p>Never owned an F2.. (I do have several Nikkormats, do they count?)</p>

<p>But: I use my camera's in A-mode now primarily, which rules out the F2..? I own both F3 and F4. The latter is collecting dust. The first one sees regular use - there certainly is a certain 'love' between me and that camera. Took some years to develop.</p>

<p>So, from my needs, I would say: F3. Does most everything I want from a camera (except giving the instant feedback that a DSLR offers, alongside immediately adjustable ISO settings). I do not want much more and not much less..</p>