over exposure Posted March 11, 2003 Share Posted March 11, 2003 Hi friends, i've just looked through many questions in the forum concerning G lenses.....i made some noise recently here in Italy just about this stuff....and about the future of the FM serie.... G lenses, full attention to digital (ok, that's another story) and a close look to nikon publications make you understand the Fm system is not on a nice position....i'm not even sure they've been happy to produce the FM3a to avoid a popular revolt.... To me Nikon is more about those cameras, do you have infos about it?? regards to all photo lovers... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ellis_vener_photography Posted March 11, 2003 Share Posted March 11, 2003 A popular revolt/ Get seriou. What would you do: Switch to Canon? Switch to Leica R cameras? Storm the doors of Nikon's corporate headquarters?\ Nikon produces the FM3a because they perceive a professional need for it, and a place in the marketplace for that product. Fot the same reason they still make AI-S lenses, Like most companies, Nikon is interested in making a profit.<P> If you want a manual focus , mostly non -automated camera , you will also not need some of the other features built into the newer G type F-Mount lenses, like VR, like AF-S autofocus matters, etc... <P> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ellis_vener_photography Posted March 11, 2003 Share Posted March 11, 2003 A popular revolt? Get serious. What would you do: Switch to Canon? Switch to Leica R cameras? Storm the doors of Nikon's corporate headquarters?<P> Nikon produces the FM3a because they perceive a professional need for it, and a place in the marketplace for that product. Fot the same reason they still make AI-S lenses, Like most companies, Nikon is interested in making a profit. If you want a manual focus , mostly non -automated camera , you will also not need some of the other features built into the newer G type F-Mount lenses, like VR, like AF-S autofocus matters, etc... <P>There is nothing noble in using a manual focusing, non automated SLR, just a weakly thought out sentimental attachment to 20 year old technology. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
douglas_green1 Posted March 11, 2003 Share Posted March 11, 2003 Well, I've heard that Nikon is quite dissappointed with the sales of the FM3a. I would suspect that it is because you can get a used F3, FM2n or FE2 for much less, and there are LOTS of them out there. BTW, Nikon the company is NOT about their older cameras. They are about selling more NEW stuff, and making money. It seems to me that there will certainly NOT be a successor to the FM3a - Realistically, what else is there to add to THAT camera? The more interesting question is how long will Nikon keep making and supporting repairs on the FM3a itself. I am much MORE concerned about the issue of G-lenses becoming the norm, and the high end pro digital bodies (Like the D100) NOT supporting AI/AIS lenses for metering of any type. THIS to me is the real concern. They are, for the first time in their history, TRYING to obsolete their older lens line, so as to force people to buy new AF lenses. They may be killing their entire franchise with this move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
over exposure Posted March 11, 2003 Author Share Posted March 11, 2003 Exactly, two years ago at the photoshow in Italy Nital (nikon italy) told me: "simply they couldn't just stop the fm2 without giving a successor.....it's a good market slice anyway", well this in their words... Despite their words, G will be the norm, i don't know if they're still interested in making cameras that can use lenses of 50 years ago....if you have a loved old camera or an FM3 yo'll be forced to look in the used market or get two lenses, one for each camera!! For my loved Fm's it will be a sad day.... I've said yet and i repeat it now, if i had to choose today i would have chosen something else than Nikon...i can accept motordrives, af and whatever else and i don't believe in "just mechanic, no batteries" philosophy like a must but at least canon when EF lenses got on the market made a clear choice presentation: follow the system or leave... With our nikons we are getting incompatibilities that get always more and more complicated.... A popular revolt for the dismission of the fm2 was a joke, sure, they just put some sugar in the medicine, in my way of seeing... Excuse me for my bad english!! :-)) The 21st of this month it will be held the photoshow in Milano again so i'll have the chance to ask them these things..... peace, Gabriele Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ellis_vener_photography Posted March 11, 2003 Share Posted March 11, 2003 To update your AI-S lenses contact Rolland Elliot, who can install Matrix metering computer chips in your AI-S lenses.<P>Sorry but I don't have link for him.<P>My thinking is that for every 5 people for whom the evolution of Nikon F-mount lenses with the addition of G-type F-mount lenses is an issue there are 95 photographers for whom it is not an issue. <P>The D1, D1h, and D1x bodies do support the use of AI-S lenses, but at the loss of Matrix metering and of course autofocus. And the D100 is 100% compatible with AI-P, AF, AF-D and AF-S Nikkor lenses<P>Let me ask you a question: how much of a premium would you pay for new lenses that have AF-S, VR, and complete AI-S body compatibility? If we want to have our cake, with extra frosting, and eat it too, we will have to pay in one way or the other. This is common sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ilkka_nissila Posted March 11, 2003 Share Posted March 11, 2003 The D100 is not a high-end pro digital camera, rather it is an <I>entry-level amateur</I> digital camera. Just look at the features. It has a number of "features" to keep the pros away from it. The fact that it is expensive is just since Nikon is trying to transfer the profit that the film manufacturers have previously made, to the camera maker. <p> I doubt that G will be mainstream. It may be that they will make all AF-S VR zoom lenses G (in addition to the crappy plastic zooms at $100 and the DX series), but that's that. The only serious G lens (out of 7) that can be used on a film camera is the 70-200/2.8G AF-S VR. It costs 2.5 times more than my 80-200/2.8D N did. If I consider upgrading my older bodies to be G compatible, it's >3.5 times more expensive than my existing zoom. I am simply not interested in spending that much money on a marginally useful feature which has serious side-effects; I just bought a carbon fibre tripod at a fraction of the cost and I'm sure it will be more useful than the VR lens. <p> It may be true that some of Nikon's customers don't care about the backwards compatibility, but those that do, are likely to be major customers. Nikon has probably made ten times more money from my purchases than those of a typical amateur, so they should also pay some attention to users like me. The time that I would be startled would be the time they introduce a VR AF-S long prime lens as a "G" type. Probably at that point they have also stopped making manual focus lenses and cameras. I cannot believe there are still enough people to buy new AI-S lenses to pay for the production of an entire line of lenses (and they're not cheap, either). I wouldn't dare to buy one any more though, since they're making them incompatible. It's absurd that they produce these lenses yet most new bodies can't use them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gary_watson Posted March 11, 2003 Share Posted March 11, 2003 What matters more than the FM series' future is its past. The FM3A sits atop a huge pile of AI'd, AI and AIS lenses and accessories produced for years.The AIS catalog has shrunk steadily over the past decade without much protest. G lenses are inconsequential provided this trove of MF and AF glass doesn't vanish mysteriously overnight.AI capable bodies aren't exactly scarce, either, so I'm wondering why you're concerned? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan_andrews Posted March 11, 2003 Share Posted March 11, 2003 Entry level digital cameras don't cost $2000 and come with interchangeable lenses. Entry level cameras cost $250 and come with built-in zoom lenses. But that's a picky point, and off-topic from the original question. Nikon understands that not all photographers want the same things--many (if not most) want to go digital at some point, and in order to make a variety of products for every need, they had to sacrifice full compatibility. However, Nikon will continue to make AIS lenses for some time, because there is a significant segment of the market that wants them--also why Kodak, Fuji, Konica, Ilford, etc keep introducing new film emulsions. Some photogs want to stay with Large Format--which is why Nikon still makes LF lenses, too. (And excellent ones, at that.) And lest we forget, Nikon make a ton of opitcs for non-photographic purposes, too. The majority of digital photographers do not shoot entirely on digital but they also shoot on film, sometimes with a point-and-shoot Coolpix, sometimes with a D100 or D1, and some even shoot with a Digital Back attached to their Toyo View bodies with Nikkor-W 105 lens mounted to a lensboard in front. So, while the FM3a hasn't sold as well as Nikon hoped, it is still selling and will probably do so for many years, alongside whatever digital bodies Nikon introduces next. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ilkka_nissila Posted March 11, 2003 Share Posted March 11, 2003 It's true that some of the G lenses would not gain increased sales by the existence of the aperture ring. I might buy the AF-S 24-85 if it were "D", even at a slightly increased cost and size. But I wouldn't buy the AF-S VR 24-120 even if it were D. What does VR do in this focal length range? Indoor party shooting: at 1/125 s, it's possible to get marginally sharp faces on people, but then VR probably wouldn't add anything. At 1/30 s you'd get sharpish environment and blurry people. No thanks! I'll switch to an f/1.4ish prime and get sharp faces with blurry background. Travel? If it involves people, again to make it to my wall, I'd prefer the people to be sharp. VR is no help. If I shoot architecture, I'll just use a prime if I'm lazy - or a tripod if I'm serious. I guess if I'm traveling with other (non-photographer) people, then this lens might win some shots (since I'd probably loose my friends if setting up my tripod ...), but again the shots wouldn't make it to my wall due to the blurry moving subjects and massive optical compromises made by fitting a wide-range zoom with VR. Q-T Luong's excellent Vietnam pictures in www.terragalleria.com demonstrate the advantages and weaknesses of this type of a lens in travel work quite aptly. The 70-200/2.8G is a useful lens for concert photography in my opinion. In that application, you can not always use a tripod, and a fast f/2 tele would be ideal. They only exist as primes and often you have to accept a large percentage of blurry shots when using a 80-200/2.8. However, in some cases you could use VR to make nice shots with people dancing, showing the motion yet not excessively unsharp. Too bad that this type of lens flares, as the stage lights would then ruin the pictures. No free lunch here. (In fact, it's a very expensive lunch in this case.) Outdoor shooting of portraits of people would gain 1-2 stops which would mean that you can shoot iso 100 film instead of 400. That's actually pretty significant. Since I have primes for shooting in backlit conditions, I might buy this lens for outdoor people photography if it were D. How much extra would I pay for the aperture ring? 2500� for the lens as a G type, plus 500� to upgrade my 2nd body to be able to use it minus my existing 80-200 would become something like 2400�, and having to replace my 135/2.8 Ai to 135/2 AF would add 1350� (since the F100 exposes incorrectly with Ai lenses) to make a whopping total of 3750�. Now, if the 70-200 were sold as a "D" lens, I'd probably just buy it at the selling price minus my old lens: 2500-600� = 1900�. That's 1850� less than the purchases necessary to make me fully aperture ring-independent. So, yes, had the 70-200 been "D", I would already have it (after all, it's not likely that the aperture ring would increase the cost of the lens by 100%). And it would increase my faith in the company immensely. Fortunately I don't have any Nikon stock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carl_madson Posted March 11, 2003 Share Posted March 11, 2003 <I>"If you want a manual focus , mostly non -automated camera , you will also not need some of the other features built into the newer G type F-Mount lenses, like VR, like AF-S autofocus matters, etc..."</I> <P> This is like saying that since someone drives pickup truck they don't need to have power steering, power brakes, an in dash radio or power windows. Obviously if you drive a pickup truck you have no need for these things so go out and buy a sedan. <P> I still don't understand why people think that because you have a manual focus camera the lens that you pay good money for you will never be mounted your AF camera also. They are not mutually exclusive. <P> For me 'G' lenses have been great excuse to start into other cameras and other formats. I was saving up for a new Nikon lens but instead I decided to purchase a T3 and a Hexar. My next "Nikon lens" purchase looks like it is going to be a Hasselblad 6x6 or a Fuji 6x17 instead. Thanks Nikon for giving me a great excuse to broaden my photographic horizons and to break into other ways of seeing the world. Wow, now that I put it that way Nikon really is improving my photography. <P> Thanks Nikon!!! <BR> Carl <P> P.S. Ellis, I would be willing to pay 10-15% more for a D type version of a G lens if they offered it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cd thacker Posted March 11, 2003 Share Posted March 11, 2003 <I>Nikon produces the FM3a because they perceive a professional need for it<P> There is nothing noble in using a manual focusing, non automated SLR, just a weakly thought out sentimental attachment to 20 year old technology.</I> -- Ellis Vener<P> I'm surprized that you would make such a rash, patently absurd statement, Ellis. But before I get into that, let me ask: If, as you say, the choice of a manual camera is purely the result of weakness of thought and sentimentality; then what is this "professional need" you refer to, that Nikon supposedly sees? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gary_watson Posted March 11, 2003 Share Posted March 11, 2003 Let's just say, Doug, that Ellis may have overstated things a bit... I wonder, though, how he justifies(on other than sentimental grounds, naturally)the use of a large format rig? Just asking... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
klix Posted March 11, 2003 Share Posted March 11, 2003 manual focusing, non automated... hmmm - if only Nikon had stayed with the RF niche (in addition to the SLR boom) and given the L&!c@ boys a run for their money... Just imagine - a Nikon RF fully compatible with AI(S), D, G and even VR lenses.... handheld at shutter speed 1/15, anyone ??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelly_flanigan1 Posted March 12, 2003 Share Posted March 12, 2003 Several of the Nikon RF lenses became Nikon F lenses. The 105mm F2.5 in Leica thread mount and the 105mm F2.5 Nikkor are the same Sonnar design; the Sonnar design was use on the Nikon F until about 1970; then the Gauss type design 105mm F2.5 came out. The newer design is better when used closer than 10 feet / 3 meters. Both designs are great from 10 feet to infinity. Thus the only change noticeable when using the 105mm beyond 10 feet is the multicoating; which came our roughly in the mid/early 1970's. My 50 year old 105mm LTM and almost new AI 105mm F lens have about the same sharpness and quality. <BR><BR>Manual focusing has been around since photography started; and the manual focus Nikkors will outlive many new autofocus lenses; which are cheaply built; have alot of plastics; and electrical contacts. The new AF stuff is great; but make it pay its way as a business investment with a shorter lifetime than a MF lens. In time the Canon EOS mount and the Nikon AF stuff will morph so that there is not backward compatibility. Canon has radically changed its lens mounts for 35mm slr's many times since 1959; while Nikon still uses the same bayonet since 1959. This fact doesnt bother too many; because they change camera systems many many times; and always want the latest hot camera system. The Latest system is to get better photos; because "the old technology" is obsolete. The marketing people love these "pros" that must have the latest system; it keeps the sales and hype up. It the latest gizmo is actually needed; so be it. If it gets little use; it never pays for itself; and if trendy; its price will drop real fast. Be happy with what you have......There will still be alot of manual focus Nikkors around 50 years from now.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShunCheung Posted March 12, 2003 Share Posted March 12, 2003 I think there is some truth in what Ellis wrote, although I kind of doubt that very many pros today would buy an FM3a for daily use, except for a few who need a mechanical backup. But then, most of those should have FM2(n)'s already. For a long time I had an FE and FE2. I hadn't use either one of them in years. A couple of years ago I decide to sell the bodies I didn't need any more, and I sold the more versatile FE2 but kept the FE only because it was my very first Nikon body after a Nikkormat. I am keeping my FE only for sentimental reasons. For example, it was the camera I used to photograph my niece at age 4; she is in her 20's now. The main problem with the FM series and other film bodies will be the availability of film. Obviously that won't be a problem in the next few years. But eventually 35mm film will become a specalty item when digital becomes the norm. It is not clear how practical it is to be completely dependent on film in the long run. Unfortunately, film expires, so you can't really stock up supply and processing chemical for the next 20 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelly_flanigan1 Posted March 12, 2003 Share Posted March 12, 2003 35mm film will be around for our lifetimes; but the weird oddball emulsions will be weeded out. There were alot of articles decades ago about how Kodak 110 and the disk films would weed out 35mm. Today most all disposables and cheap P & S cameras use 35mm; which is a good thing. Here Walmart sells 50 to 100 + film cameras (including disposables); for every digital camera. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
over exposure Posted March 12, 2003 Author Share Posted March 12, 2003 Thank you everyone for your interest in this discussion, anyway� about film availability, as written by Schun Cheung I�m not so worried�..I think there will be forever some independent company able to produce camera that eats film, and film and camera companies know well that is a slice market�..after all you still can shoot and process 8x11!! This because there will always be people that love film, maybe because that day they have no intention to light on a computer, because they are searching a different approach in a digital world, maybe for some editorial or particular use�.there�s always been the need of a non-automated approach here and then, in every discipline, not just in photography� E-mails are fantastic, but try writing and receiving classic letters handwritten, man that�s a thing that stays for life and doesn�t get lost at the next pc trouble or �format� order�. BACK to the FM stuffs� I can deal with the death of AI lenses, but AFD where a decent solution, expecially If you had an Af body, excluding some specialistic AI lens� I hate the G solution, because it forces me to think well before choosing a new lens for my af body. I can�t surely buy a second for my FM (or even older af, just of some years ago!!!!), I can�t invert �em and born (in their words) to equipe entry level zooms, instead are taking first class places in nikon list�just wait a little for G primes�. What about if I still love a little older camera I have? What if I need to backup a mechanic for battery problems? Even hating to write it, if the G series will become the norm, I�m not sure I�ll stay on Nikon, having to change all those optics I have is not really a nice deal�.. It was enough to lock the aperture ring if you prefer 1\3 step value electronic aperture selection, the weight change is ridiculous, the versatility sure better, and they wouldn�t have so many customers just buying universal lenses with classical rings, or worse, nothing to see what happens, while asking if their first Dslr will have the Nikon name on it�. Someone writed �Nikon made more money from us old users than from new entries, I would expect some respect� (or something like that�)�.i hope that they will make a choice different from the present, from the F80 in then, with the elimination of the mechanic aperture simulator, to me isn�t nikon anymore, simply. Regards, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2yellowdogs Posted March 12, 2003 Share Posted March 12, 2003 I have to second a lot of what Ellis wrote. The FM3a was produced because Nikon saw a market for it. Nothing more or less. They saw profit potential. I don't think they were in fear of hundreds of pasty-faced photographers storming Japan with torches ablaze if they had decided not to produce it. I own and FM3a and love it. It's fun to use, as are the excellent AI-S lenses. I enjoy using them. Nothing more or less. As long as there are a enough people out there like me, the FM series will remain alive and well. If digital (or the fear of digital) prompts enough people to stop purchasing FM3a's they'll stop making them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
over exposure Posted March 12, 2003 Author Share Posted March 12, 2003 Yes , iknow market rules are over everything, but in reality i think that with the arrive of digital a mechanical camera is the better choice you can make as a backup body or anyway as an alternative when you need\want to use film... I find as much electronic in an F5 as in a D100, an alternative is something else, don't you think?? Insted they are making lenses with no aperture rings and bodies that gets mute with older lenses.... Again, their words (at leas at NIkon Italy) were "No, they couldn't just stop"...Not because they were afraid of being beaten to death of course, but because a revolt means losing customers, as is happening now.....ask around how many Nikon users are disappointed, even taking a look in the forum, you find so many of 'em.... Thanks a lot! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angel_o. Posted March 12, 2003 Share Posted March 12, 2003 <i>"No, they couldn't just stop"...Not because they were afraid of being beaten to death of course, but because a revolt..."</i><br><br> Sorry, but I have to ask now:<br><br> Is <i>Vito Corleone</i> involved in this thread? :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2yellowdogs Posted March 12, 2003 Share Posted March 12, 2003 <i>"No, they couldn't just stop"...Not because they were afraid of being beaten to death of course, but because a revolt means losing customers..."</i></p> Gabriele, you do an excellent job of supporting my point. They can't stop because that would mean forgoing an active and profitable market for manual bodies. </p> As for a manual body being a better backup for a digital than an AF body, I can't agree there either. Sure, you have battery independence, but doesn't it make more sense to have an F100 (or even an N80) body in your bag that can make full use of all of the lenses you're already using with your D1 or D100? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hique Posted March 12, 2003 Share Posted March 12, 2003 "...because they perceive a professional need for it..." Ellis, Nikon doesn't sell to pros exclusively. There are many amateurs spending much money on Nikon gear. And D100 is 100% compatible with Ai-p lenses, but how many of the Ai lenses are 'p'? What about terrific Ai-s lenses? And your 5 / 95 seems to be wrong since there are many people discussing this (what shows that there are many customers unhappy with G lenses). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
over exposure Posted March 12, 2003 Author Share Posted March 12, 2003 yes, it'a good companion of a digit body...but in my personal opinion (my question was "the future of the FM system") i'd love to have a mechanic to make an alternative to a digital body in the near future... I repeat, in reality i can live with motordrives, af and incorporated flashes, if there will be no alternative except too much expensive leicas or whatever.... Corleone shoots with Canon, so i don't think he cares.. :-) thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hique Posted March 12, 2003 Share Posted March 12, 2003 Anyway, for those unhappy with G-lenses... http://www.therealnikon.com Thanks to Carl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now