New Camera-Nikon F5 vs. F100

[william_sharwell]

I am going to "update" my N90-I a want to get either an F100 or an

F5. The advantage of the F5 would be the metering and mirror

lockup. The disadvantage would be additional weight and the $$.

 

The majority of my photography consists of bird and nature subjects

in Florida. I know many rave about the F5 metering. Of those who

own the F5 how many usually leave the camera on matrix without

correction?

 

What other questions should I be asking myself?

 

Thanks..

William Sharwell

[ShunCheung]

I have used both of these cameras for nature work and compared their meters explicitely. At least I don't see much difference between the F5 and the F100 meter readings under the same conditions. In other words, IMO the F100 meter is clearly good enough. If you do macro work and need MLU, the F5 is the way to go assuming that you can afford one. Otherwise, the F5 is a more durable camera, but you pay for it in terms of price and weight.

[drc]

As Shun says, the F5 is more durable and the meters are the same. Also mirror lock might be important to you as might the 100% viewfinder. In cold conditions the option to manually rewind film is a determining factor personally, because the F100 only allows motorized rewind that consumes it's fair share of batterys if your going to be going through a lot of film.

 

David Crossley/Crossley Photography...www.crossleyphotography.com

[jim_griffin1]

William:

 

I wouldn't go as far to say the meters are the same(1005 rgb vs 10 point matrix), but for most circumstances the F100 meter will suffice. Having said that, I purchased the F5 because of the "almost" foolproof meter. You obviously have to watch out for backlit subjects and also the surroundings around bird and nature subjects. It is not too hard though to switch to spot or center. For most of my shots I will use matrix, but you still need to watch your composition so as not to mess up the lighting on your subject for nature. For, landscape shots the meter of the F5 is absolutely amazing. The extra weight doesn't bother me as I'm used to carrying a heavy golf bag over at least 4 miles. Also, if you add the vertical grip to the F100 it becomes only slightly lighter than the F5. Either camera is a great camera.

[rolland_elliott]

Why would anyone want to buy a camera (like the F100) for nature photography which doesn't have mirror lock up? If you truly serious about bird photography You'll have a lens that weighs over 10 pounds and a clunky tripod and head too boot. The extra few ounces of an F5 won't hurt.

[ShunCheung]

In my case, I bought my F5 at the end of 1997, about a year after it was first introduced. Two years later, I wanted a second body with modern AF (to replace my F4), and I bought an F100 in January 2000, also about a year since that model was first introduced. I didn't think I needed two F5s and getting the F100 saved me a few hundred dollars.

 

Since I bought the F100, I did quite a bit of testing between the meters, including a trip to Tanzania early this year. I honestly don't see much difference. The F5's meter isn't totally fool-proof either, as it does have problems with snow scenes.

 

I don't use MLU much for bird photography as I shoot moving subjects quite a bit. My main application for MLU is macro work. As it has been pointed out, the F5 has manual rewind, interchangable viewfinders .... If you need one of those features, the F5 is the only way to go. Otherwise, IMO the F100 is good enough and you might as well save a few hundred dollars for more film, more lens(es), travel ....

[paul_dibiase3]

While I have not compared the F100 meter to the meter of the F5, I have compared it to the N90s and the F100 definetly handles some of the trickier exposure problems better. For example, animals with white fur were often underexposed with the N90s. The F100 gets the correct exposure. The F100 also seems to handle subjects suffering from bright side-light better than the N90s. Not that the N90s is bad, but the F100 is better.

 

If you can wait a while, I would suggest keeping you money safe and wait to see what the D2 is like. Yes, I realize nobody knows when the D2 will arrive or what it will be like. I can't help but think that my F100 may be the last film camera I buy.

[tom_hill1]

I totally agree that the F5 is excellent and the meter is wonderful. It isn't infalible but it's really great. I apply an exposure compensation to my F5 lots of times. This is especially true during minimum light photography;pre-dawn, early dusk. It's usually not very much (plus or minus .3EV) but it does make a difference.

 

Probably the only thing I might add is compatibility of the F5 accessories with the F100. When I first moved from the F90x to F5 I knew I was getting a second body. One thing that turned me off to the F100 as a second body was the battery holder isn't compatible between the two cameras. I do understand the D1 takes the F100's battery holder--I could be mistaken though. This little thing and a couple others pushed me in buying the F5 instead of the F100.

 

Cheers

[dan_smith]

Ask yourself if you will ever need interchangeable viewfinders. If so, it is the F5. Will you ever need a 250 exposure back? If so, it is the F5. Ever need the 8 frames per second film advance for fast action with a bird in flight or fleeting instant? If so, it is the F5. Then the RGB metering that the F100 does not have. I don't know if the F100 will allow you to manually rewind the film as the F5 does, but in very cold weather this could be a lifesaver in keeping static marks & film breakage to a minimum. And the mirror lockup is a good feature which makes one wonder why the makers put out anything called a 'pro camera' without it.

[knut_sverre_horn]

There's no doubt in my mind: Get the F5 with 8 frames per second. The world is already full of perfectly sharp, perfectly exposed and dead boring bird portraits. More photographers should aim at getting good action shots - flying, fighting, displaying, etc.

[antti_luukkonen]

William,

 

I have been in the same situation as you are right now. Two years ago I wanted to upgrade my F90X and I had hard time deciding which body to buy, F100 or F5. I chose F100 and I have been very satisfied with it. Last April I bought also F5 because I need two bodies. I do almost all my macro work with F5 because of the MLU, F100 is not so good for macro. I have compared the metering a lot and my honest conclusion is that the matrix meter �difference� is definitely not a reason to buy F5. I totally agree with Shun that the metering does not differ from F5. You will be surpised of the difference in metering between F90X and F100/F5, though you still need exposure compensation in tricky situations (with either bodies). There is NO SUCH A CAMERA (at least not yet) that can handle for example storng backlight situations.

 

The critical points between these two bodies have already been mentioned in this thread: MLU, FPS, weight (unless you want to buy MB-15, which is IMO a necessity in F100), 100% wiewfinder, interchanceable wiewfinders an so on. You mentioned that you need it for bird photography at Florida area so I presume that cold conditions are not the main issue here.

 

I�d like to accentuate few features in F100 that I have found important for a bird photographer. F100 blinks red the chosen AF sensor. It is a lot easier to see the chosen sensor than in F5 (darkened). Especially for bird and other action photography there is one nice feature in F100: easy exposure compensation. You can set it on by Custom Setting 13. This allows you to compensate the exposure with your thumb while you are following for example a flying bird, and keep your finger at the shutter release button. You dont have to press any extra buttons, just roll the rear wheel and keep your frontfinger at the shutter release. You don´t find this feature in F5 and it was one of the main reasons why I decided to buy F100 instead of F5.

 

I'm also using CF1 for automatic rewind at the end of the roll and CF8 for film advance with the closing of the back. These settings make the film chace a lot quicker.

 

If I remember right, some of these features can be set in F5 but only by using the Photo Secretary.

 

If you have more questions about these two bodies, don�t hesitate to email me.

 

Take care

[ellis_vener_photography]

The meters in the F100 and F5 ARE definitely different. Color

matrix metering makes a difference. As far as using the bias

control on any camera, I use this as a quick way of setting the E.I.

of a film as I rarely find that with color films the official sensitivity

rating of the film (the ISO) rarely corresponds exactly with the way

I see color, the way the labs I use process the film, and my

interpretation of a scene. I very rarely use spot or center weighted

metering, but I appreciate having those options.<P>

 

When it came time to upgrade from N90s bodies,I choose the F5

body over the F100 for the following reasons: color matrix

metering, a shorter delay time between pushing the shutter

release and the camera firing, slightly faster AF acquisition of

target , 100% viewing in the view finder, a removable finder, and

mirror lockup. The F5 also felt better in my hands. I wish the F5

had a programmable option to make the AF sensors light up the

way they do in the F100 (or not) and also a programmable way to

lock the AF sensor into one spot. otherwise I think it is a terrific

camera and I don't regret the choice. You can make the F100

faster withthe add on module but then you have a camera that is

pretty much the same cost, size and weight of the F5 without

color matrix metering, etc.

[antti_luukkonen]

Ellis,

 

It is true that the meters are different, but despite this the metering results are still the same. Definitely 3D CMM is a great breakthrough and it must be much more sophisticated and complicated from the technical point of view than what the 10 segment matrix of F100 is. For the 10 SMM Nikon must have used the exposure information they got when they were creating 3D CMM, because the results are so alike. My personal experience from these meters relies on side-by-side �comparisons. The exposure time and apperture readings given by both cameras are the same in every situation and that is what counts. Even Björn Roslett has come to this conclusion, check http://hawk.foto.no/pinhole/nikon/f100_rev.html, if there is not enough weight in my opinions =8-O.

 

To me the similarity between these meters is a great relief. I know that I don�t have to think which body I am using when making exposure correction in fast shooting sessions.

 

All in all, I just think that the differences in metering between these bodies is minimal, and it is good to know, when choosing between these two products. William, IMHO is that the superiority of 3D CMM over 10 SMM is exaggerated.

 

We have different needs because our habits and targets in photography and therefore our needs for equipments vary. This is why I do see a good point for some to buy F100 and not F5, which too often seems to be a must at these forums. Anyway, to me it is a matter of indifference who buys and what, I just like to share the information I got. I am very, (and let me say this clear enough) very happy with both bodies and their metering results ;^).

 

Peace

[mark_haflich]

You can lock the sensor by using the lock buttton on the flapped panel on the back of the camera. If you are shooting in the dark with a flash it is all too easy to bump the rocker switching fom the center sensor to one of the four sensors on the extremities and then the camera won't fire because of the flash assist beam not being detected. To me the F5 "feels" better than the F100. The F100 "feels" very "plasticy" (not a word) in comparison. To me it feels cheap. I bought a second F5 as my back up because of this. Also if the first F5 fails, I do not have to go to a lesser camera (I need all the help I can get) and the camera being the same to familiarize myself with the different controls. The main downside to me is that the F100 being ligher it is easier to handle when doing bird flight shots with a 400mm F5.6 or the new 80-400VR. For what it matters, when the D2 comes out I will probably stop shooting film. The cost savings in film and processing for a 3-week safari of a 5 day IPT (Arthur Morris) shoot would pay for the camera.

[tk]

I have both.

I'm sure if you are looking at either you know the "technical" differences in them.

 

In real world use, however, it is different.

 

If money is not the "restraining" factor, get the F5.

The F100 is great, but it is no F5.

Not built as well, in small areas, much less larger ones.

I HATE the bulk of the F5, but I deal with it. That is the only complaint. I like the slim size of the 100. The weight of the 5 doesn't bother me, but it is so damb big! But, the more you use it, the more thought you can see was put into it. It is very customizable for your type of photography, much more so than the 100. And, it takes more of the old lenses the 100 will not accept. Also it has ADR for AIS lense, which is useful since the aperature is not displayed electronically. The F5 is simply the better camera. There are many reasons why, that I dont feel like getting into. The F100 is great, but if money is not the limiting factor, go for the 5. You will not regret it. The 100 seems like a compromise, now that I have both. If you want any help Email me.