Will we ever see a Nikon F6?

[k_michael]

Will we ever see a Nikon F6?

[jim_gifford]

Sure. The market for film cameras will last quite a while, and Nikon will need to introduce additional products to serve that market.

[pmj]

Does it matter?

[hal_bissinger]

What is it about the F5 that could be improved?

[ilkka_nissila]

The focusing screen could have lit focus point markers, like on the F100. A closest-point focus priority mode would also be nice. The contrast on the focusing screen could be better for manual focusing like that on the F4. There could also be a mode for slower AF for the junk lenses.

 

The F6, if it ever comes out, would likely be released in 2004, eight years being the time between new models in the series.

[Ken Katz]

Nikon will introduce an F6 if (a) they believe they can earn a profit on it, based on potential sales volume, or (b) need it defend their market position with professional and advanced amateur film shooters (like if Canon introduces a �super duper� EOS 1Vs).

 

With Nikon and Canon selling a $6,000+ DSLR every two years to professionals and advanced (and wealthy) amateurs, why should they bother with new professional grade film bodies?

[douglas_green1]

Well Hal, it could have all the same features and reliability, but weigh half as much.

 

IMHO, this is the great tragedy of Olympus bailing on the 35mm SLR market. Now there's nobody there to keep Nikon and Canon honest so that they put some effort into preventing these monsters from bloating to gargantuan proportions.

[ilkka_nissila]

Douglas, the F5 is no bigger than the other F-series cameras yet it has more features, so your point about the influence of Olympus isn't supported by facts. Which half would you cut off? The viewfinder? The batteries? The film transport system? The lens mount?

 

The weight is actually beneficial - sharper pictures. I agree that it's a bit of a pain to carry around but it's not like it were the only film-based camera on the market today. You take your pick and spend your money.

[douglas_green1]

Ikka, that's just silly. An F5 DWARFS an F3. The main difference being, the Motor is not ALWAYS there taking up space and adding weight. There are NUMEROUS occasions where I would choose not to use, nor carry a Motor Drive, yet I still want a rugged pro-caliber camera with viewfinder options. BTW, the F3 is the only F-series camera that came out when Olympus was a viable player. That was my point.

[hal_bissinger]

I've never even considered Olympus to be in the same league as Canon or Nikon so I don't know what you are talking about. <p>

As to the weight of the F5, as I remember from actually weighing both it and a N90s, the F5 is less than 8 ounces more than the N90s, both loaded with lithium batteries and no lens. You can barely tell the difference if you hold one after the other. Although nobody complains about the weight of something like the N90s, you always hear griping about the F5. <p>

Now, i'll agree that the F5 is bigger, but I've never considered that to be a problem either.

[douglas_green1]

I agree, Olympus is NOT in the same league as Nikon or Canon. In terms of ergonomics and design elegance, the OM series is LEAGUES more advanced than any Nikon or Canon. Just because Olympus never built a camera that was directly targetted at the F-series, does not diminish the fact that the OM-1 and OM-2 were probably the most influential 35mm SLR designs since the original Nikon F. And as instruments, the OM-1, OM-2, and OM-3, and OM-4 could EASILY compare favorably to the Nikon FM, FE, FM-2n and FE-2, which are the cameras that they were INTENDED to compare with. Nikon won out because of it's far superior commitment to system support of pros, and the breadth of it's lens and accessory lines, as well as the fact that it was already the incumbent supplier to the market. But as far as the actual CAMERAS are concerned, you are remiss to dismiss the Olympus models. I personally own and use Nikons, because the Olympus is a dead-end system, but there is NO QUESTION that the Olympus cameras were at least as well made, and superior in design efficiency and ergonomics to the directly competing Nikon models.

[Brian]

<P>I don't know how we got into this, but it's worth recalling that when the 35mm format still camera was introduced all those years ago, it was as a <B>miniature</B> camera. In all its years of development and refinement, the saving grace of the 35mm camera (compensating for the pathetic, postage-stamp sized negative) was the small size.</P><P>The Olympus OM-1 was a big success and a very influential camera because it packed so many features into a true miniature size. Olympus also tried, with some success, to make the Zuiko lenses smaller than the competition. Nikon did not attempt to compete with Olympus, but to dismiss Olympus as "not in the same league" is to miss the point. Nikon have succeeded in their own niche, making bloated, oversize, overweight 35mm SLRs, but bigger does not equal better.</P><P>For their own strategic reasons, Olympus got out of interchangeable-lens SLRs but they are still very much a player worldwide in the imaging business.</P>

[ilkka_nissila]

Sure, an F3 without motor, but again if you put the motor on, I believe it becomes both bigger and heavier than the F5. Both AF and the motor drive increase the sharpness of handheld shots in many cases, let alone the improvement in response time.

 

The F5 is what it is due to market demand. Sure, there are uses for a smaller camera without a motor drive. In fact, for many years I used the F3 that way, in fact I never even considered the huge MD due to the enormity of the thing. I'm much happier with the F5. Elegance sometimes conflicts with effectiveness.

[douglas_green1]

And likewise, I have never seriously considered an F5, because there is nothing it does better than my F3s except autofocus, and an N90s does that quite sufficiently for my needs on the rare occassions that I use autofocus. Oh, the F5 WOULD give me an opportunity to stop using my brain while relying on the matrix metering, but I have no interest in matrix metering. Not that there aren't plenty of photographers that can't have their knowledge of exposure fundamentals improved by letting a computer do it for them, so I guess the F5 does offer that market segment some advantages.

[ilkka_nissila]

The F5 also has a spot meter. A manual exposure scale with 1/3 stop precision. Adjustable self timer delay so that you don't have to wait for 10 seconds for the wind to blow the flowers away. It also allows you to use a handheld meter with macro lenses and automatically compensates for the (M+1)^2 factor. Same thing with variable aperture zooms - no longer variable aperture. Long exposure times without accessories. A viewfinder light that actually works after several years of use. Autobracketing. The F5 has many features which make it easier to achieve a controlled end result. I guess there is no rational reason to like it?

[mskovacs]

They could make the aperture stop down when the mirror is locked like the F thru F4. Big design flaw for the macro shooters IMO.

 

They could certainly make improvements in the battery consumption.

 

The F5 is a revolutionary design but its by no means so perfect that there is no room for advancement. I can't see an F6 being much more of an evolutionary design though, much like the F to F2.

[kelly_flanigan1]

Have two F's and one F2. <BR><BR>None have ever broke or needed a CLA. <BR>Whats all this fuss about?

[zapata_espinoza]

Try to carry a Leica M around the whole day with cramping hands and you learn to appreciate the ergonomics of the F5.

[carloguerrero]

Will we ever see any professional film camera from Nikon???

 

It's a big question as Canon has already shown its commitment to Digital... Nikon may also want to go in that same direction.

 

With the D2H out, we can now wait for something else...

 

Carlo Ma. Guerrero

[Mike D]

It would be nice to have a LCD screen on the back of the next Nikon body. One of the big advantages of digital is that you can see an instant image. Imagine the benefit of a new film camera that could capture instant images so you can see what you're going to get on film after processing.

[k_michael]

There was actually sometalk on another web site of the F6 being just that! Giving a preview before it stores the image to film. Can you imagine what that will cost?

[carloguerrero]

I think if there would be an F6 it would still be the typical modular Nikon... but this time with a modular DigitalBack which can easily be replaced with standard film capabilities.

 

Now that would be a good one. Just imagine being able to use one camera body... or several... for different types of photography (film and digital)

 

I'm still hoping that they come up with an F6 despite the rumors that Nikon will no longer manufacture professional film cameras.

 

Carlo

[ahmad_mujtaba]

Maybe. The Nikon D2H uses the MultiCAM 2000 sensor with 9 AF points. The f5 and F100 being both 5+ years old, an upgrade is due. The F6 and the successor to the F100 may use the multicam 2000 sensor.

[luag]

thom hogan's prediction is very very interesting...and will be very sweet if it ever happen this year as he predicted.

<br>

<br>

The third new Nikon DSLR will shake up the industry. Last year I predicted the appearance of parts of the F6 (the autofocus system ended up in the D2h). Well, this year I'm going further, saying it will appear fully. Essentially, the F6 will be like a medium format camera in 35mm size. The main component will simply be a light-proof box with lens mount, shutter, and mirror mechanism. Perhaps that part will also have a power supply in it. But everything else (and perhaps the power supply) will be modular. You'll have your choice of bolt-on film or digital backs and your choice of viewfinders. Backs and viewfinders can be interchanged mid-roll/mid-card. I'll go further and point out that Nikon will use the Olympics in Greece to launch this hybrid. If I had to guess at price, I'd guess US$2000 for the base, US$1000 for the viewfinder/metering; US$500 for a film back, and US$2500 for a digital back. The interesting thing will be whether Fujifilm also provides a digital back for this camera, as they have a full-frame 11mp sensor that would be perfect for it (and, of course, interpolated up to 22mp in finished images). Even more interesting will be that at least one digital back choice down the road (probably not 2004, though) will be a dedicated high ISO back. And, the whole thing will do 8 fps on film and whatever the digital sensor can handle (up to 8 fps). Medium format camera makers, such as Mamiya, will be cringing when they see this product. Kodak will, too, as it means that they'll have to consider making a back for it, but with a much lower price point than their current MF backs to stay competitive.

[carloguerrero]

Nikon's committment to film photography is now limited... It's so sad that the F6 doesn't embody the true evolution of the previous F models. It feels more like an F5 mixed with an F100 and nothing more.