mskovacs Posted March 2, 2004 Share Posted March 2, 2004 I finally got around to scanning and PDFing the old modern photographyreview of the F3. There's some useful information in here for users,especially on metering patterns and the like. ENJOY! I give full credit to the magazine for this work and ask that it notbe modified in any manner. (if somebody wants to host it, that would be great) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan_brown4 Posted March 2, 2004 Share Posted March 2, 2004 Thanks Mike. I picked up an F3HP recently, which is at Nikon USA getting a full CLA right now. I can't wait to get it back and start shooting it again. The Modern test will keep my interest piqued in the mean time. Gotta love that HP finder, best ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert_Lai Posted March 2, 2004 Share Posted March 2, 2004 Thanks Mike!<p>I did remember correctly that the TTL flash meter pattern was rectangular (figure on page 119). As a bonus, there is a review of the 50mm f/1.4 AIS lens too!<p>I was in Toronto this past weekend, but I didn't have a chance to go to the library to look for the magazine. I'm glad that you did. I was there to go over my income taxes with the accountant. As a resident alien in the US, I have the privilege of paying both the US and Canadian taxes. :-( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mskovacs Posted March 2, 2004 Author Share Posted March 2, 2004 Lucky you...2 years of Canadian tax is it not? I think that review must be of the AI 50/1.4. AIS didn't come out for a couple years later did it not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_h._hartman Posted March 2, 2004 Share Posted March 2, 2004 Thank you Mike! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill_schmidt Posted March 2, 2004 Share Posted March 2, 2004 Tuesday 10:30 AM EST and the link dosen't see to work any more. Any advice? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mskovacs Posted March 2, 2004 Author Share Posted March 2, 2004 Probably the usual photo.net slowdown issues because it just worked for me. Hopefully someone will agree to host the file. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShunCheung Posted March 2, 2004 Share Posted March 2, 2004 The link still works for me. It is a 3.8M file and takes a little while to download. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arnabdas Posted March 2, 2004 Share Posted March 2, 2004 Works for me too. Try right-clicking and choose "Save as ..." to have a better sense of download progress. If you just click, chances are it is trying to open up inside the browser. Mike are you trying to get non F3-owners jealous? I've stopped reading it halfway. I'll delete it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mskovacs Posted March 2, 2004 Author Share Posted March 2, 2004 Actually if there is demand, I may get around to doing the FM2 and FE2 reviews as well. Both should hold some appeal to FM3A users like yourself. (sorry MP is dead since 1989) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arnabdas Posted March 2, 2004 Share Posted March 2, 2004 Thanks Mike! I'm sure you understand I was just kidding with my above comments ;) <P> Both FM2 and FE2 reviews would be great -- count me in. I'd probably like to have the FE2 one first, because 1. it is more similar to FM3A and 2. it is the more "substantial" of the two. <P> BTW, am curious about the FM2 review -- what did they manage to write, since this camera is so basic? If I were to write an FM2 review myself, I'd probably copy-paste the same phrase "Great camera, Great camera ..." all over and across two pages! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mskovacs Posted March 2, 2004 Author Share Posted March 2, 2004 I have no idea because I haven't read either the FE2 or FM2 reviews yet, but they are certain to exist. If you think about it the F3 is pretty basic too in comparison to an F5! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul_neuthaler Posted March 2, 2004 Share Posted March 2, 2004 Thanks, Mike. A real service. I appreciate it. Paul Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian1664876441 Posted March 2, 2004 Share Posted March 2, 2004 Thankyou, that was very interesting. Dating myself, I believe that I have the similar F2 review at home. Is anyone interested in more of these? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert_Lai Posted March 2, 2004 Share Posted March 2, 2004 Brian,<p>Give us the F2 review!<p>Anyone have the F and F4 reviews too? I recall that Modern Photography did review the F4 before MP became absorbed by the BORG known as Pop Photo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan_brown4 Posted March 2, 2004 Share Posted March 2, 2004 I actually read the review at lunch today. Wow, the camera mags don't do them like that anymore! I see why so many folks thought so highly of Modern Photography. A very well done review for an important (and they know it) product revolution. Heck, I'm proud to be anbd F3 shooter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eric_. Posted March 2, 2004 Share Posted March 2, 2004 Thanks Mike, excellent service. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
._._z Posted March 2, 2004 Share Posted March 2, 2004 It shows a big difference in how reviews have changed over time. Nowadays most photo magazines parrot the press releases of the camera manufacturers and show a few blah shots taken with the camera. The era of the Old PopPhoto, ModernPhoto (which got bought by and subsumed into PopPhoto), Camera and the like are long gone. Even the better British mags like Amateur Photography often put unknowledgeable people in charge of reviews (like one a couple of years ago in which the reviewer or a 'vintage' Canon A-1 marveled at how he had to learn how to focus the camera himself -- yeesh). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sumo_kun Posted March 2, 2004 Share Posted March 2, 2004 WOW! They certainly don't do them like that anymore! It reminds me of the reviews here in the Japanese mags (Asahi Camera, Nippon Camera). They provide loads of technical data and they are very thorough. I started reading them about a year ago when I got here and there is such a huge difference in quality between the British mags I was used to and these Japanese ones. They've also been really inspiring in taking photos too. Well, I'd better stop there or it'll turn into a magazine review. Please post the FM2 and F2 reviews!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saikat.pathak Posted March 2, 2004 Share Posted March 2, 2004 Thanks a ton Mike. That's wonderful service to the F3 lovers. Thank you, thank you, thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marco_p1 Posted March 3, 2004 Share Posted March 3, 2004 Thank you relly Mike, I was after the flash metering pattern of the f3, and I've finally found the answer. Bye, Marco Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian1664876441 Posted March 3, 2004 Share Posted March 3, 2004 I found the Pop Photo Nikon F2 Lab test; Jan 1973. I will put it on the scan list and post within a week or so. I also found the big color spread announcing the Nikon F2. I will add it to the scan list. Not technical, but if you have an F2 you will want it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rolf_lockwood Posted March 5, 2004 Share Posted March 5, 2004 You've heard thanks from a lot of folks, but I have to add my own. I continue to be impressed by my somewhat ratty F3 acquired just a couple of years ago, so much so that I just bought an even rattier one. They both work superbly. And now I understand them better. Rolf in Toronto Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jack_johnston Posted March 16, 2004 Share Posted March 16, 2004 To accompany the inlflation calculation I made with the FE2's original retail price, the F3 (with a 50mm f/1.8 Nikkor) would cost $2,600 in 2002. 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