Richard Williams

<p>When I was using the F100 heavily, I always bought lithium AAs. Nikon claims 40-110 rolls of film (depending on exact usage) from one set of these batteries at 20C (less in the cold). I think I typically got dozens of rolls from a single set, but always kept spares handy - the 'fuel gauge' goes quite quickly from half-full to empty. I can see the attraction of the full-on analogue experience (those K1000s beloved of photo schools probably still have a few years of life in them), but of course it can also be handy to have something that works the same way as the dSLR you probably also own, with all the convenience of fast AF etc.</p>

<blockquote> <p>Richard mentioned the sticky rear grip on the F100. I have not seen an F100 since 2012 that did not have this happen to them and it does mess up the camera. I have a rear door for mine on back-order and I don't suppose that order will ever be filled...</p> </blockquote> <p> With mine, the back was really quite sticky after extended storage in a camera bag - maybe the rubber isn't completely stable over time (possibly exacerbated by outgassing in a confined space), or perhaps there was some interaction with other polymers in the bag. In my case, simply leaving the camera sitting on an open shelf for a few weeks reduced the stickiness significantly, and it's now at an acceptable level, so that I'm happy to use it again. Various treatments have been suggested for more severe cases (the problem is not confined to the F100), but I haven't tried them. Odd that it doesn't seem to have affected the front grips at all - the camera back is probably where you're most likely to have an issue, either this grip 'stickiness', or dirty contacts on the multi-selector, or a broken plastic door latch. Spares may now be hard to find. It would be great to have an F6, of course, but it's probably going to be 3-4x the price of an F100. The F5 is more affordable, overlapping with the high end of the F100 price range - great camera, but larger and heavier than I'd want to carry around all day. The F80 would be another (very cheap) option - a sort of 'baby F100' that's also compatible with modern AF-S and VR lenses, though the viewfinder, AF and general handling aren't as good.</p>

<blockquote> <p>So maybe I should spend my money on lenses or save it for a better digital camera in the future, do you agree?</p> </blockquote> <p> You can argue it either way, depending on your priorities. Lenses are always a good investment if you're going to stick with Nikon for digital. On the other hand, all recent Nikon lenses are AF-S, which won't autofocus on the F50 as you've found, so you'll either be restricting yourself to older lenses or doing without autofocus. The F100 has a very decent autofocus system even by modern standards, fully compatible with AF-S and VR, and you may see the benefit in your street work (F50 era AF can struggle with moving subjects). It's also a very nice camera to use (I'd pick it over anything except perhaps the much more expensive F6) with an excellent viewfinder and the same dual command dial layout as the dSLRs, making it easy to switch between film and digital. It's compatible with nearly all current Nikon technology except iTTL flash and of course DX lenses (which are designed only for the digital models with smaller sensors - they aren't suitable for film SLRs or FX dSLRs).</p> <p>A few things to check when buying a used F100 have already been mentioned. Also make sure the grip surface isn't 'sticky', that there's no damage to the door latch (a potential weak point), that the focus points respond properly to the multi-selector on the back in every direction, and that you have the standard AA battery holder (there was also an optional holder for CR123A batteries).</p>

<blockquote> <p>That British repair guy - Lutton? - Blogged tape might have impact on silkscreened inscriptions. Thats all I am recalling.</p> </blockquote> <p>http://www.angelfire.com/biz/Leica/page3.html</p> <p>He also says:</p> <p>"If you have ever seen a chrome M camera that has had tape on for a number of years you will find that the glue in the tape will actually stain the chrome . It is impossible to remove these marks, so that whatever is done there will always be a tell-tail stain where the tape was. And that is on chrome !"<br> <br />Personally I wouldn't, but if you must, try gaffer tape, which is designed not to leave a residue, at least for short term use.</p>

<blockquote> <p>r example ViewNX 2.10.2 works perfectly on my computer (no longer downloadable from Nikon though) but 2.10.3 crashes when I select the My Pictures folder, every time.</p> </blockquote> <p>2.10.2 is still floating around, e.g.:<br> https://nikoneurope-en.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/62480</p> <p>I haven't bothered with VNX-2 (or VNX-i) since I installed Capture NX-D. It's a bit slow, but that's really the only problem I have with it. The image browser is decent enough not to have to bother with a separate program. We've lost some of the advanced features of the old payware (mainly the CNX control points), but on the other hand with NX-D we're getting a more capable free product than VNX-2. The conversion quality seems to be the same as always, and if anything I prefer a sidecar file to editing the NEF directly (with the potential to corrupt it).</p>

<blockquote> <p>If you just get a kit, fine, but a complete system would (to me at least) imply that you are confident that the manufacturer at least meet your needs. If they do so now, they would also be likely to do so in the foreseable future.</p> </blockquote> <p>One thing that has disappointed a fair number of photographers who bought into Nikon in the D300/D700 era is that the system used to include mid-range cameras capable of 8fps, but no longer does - they now expect you to get a single digit body to exceed 6 fps (DX) / 6.5 fps (FX) without cropping. If Canon can do 10 fps at 20 Mpix without a grip, Nikon ought to be able to manage 8 fps at 24 Mpix, even if they insist on requiring a grip to make this work. Hopefully the 7D2 will shake Nikon out of their 'product differentiation' complacency, and they won't just cede the mid-priced / mid-sized sports body market to Canon.</p>

<p>Ffordes have the T2 Gold for £500-£600 and the TVS III for £300-£350.</p>

<p>One more - i7-3770K @ 3.5GHz (max 3.9 GHz), 2GB Radeon 7750, 16GB RAM, with 64-bit CS6 configured to use the default 60% of RAM. Windows 8.1, Photoshop and the file all on a 256GB SSD. Filter->Liquify displays the image in less than a second.</p>

<p>Interesting that Sandisk, despite being co-creators of the XQD standard, have not bothered to make any cards! Not exactly a vote of confidence...</p>

<p>It's recorded in the metadata of every image (well certainly every NEF, and I think the in-camera jpegs) . Take an image file straight from the camera and upload it here:</p> <p>http://regex.info/exif.cgi</p> <p>Search the page for the 'Serial Number' field (under 'MakerNotes').</p>

<p>The D300 has already lost around 75% of its original value, so it'll probably depreciate a bit more gently over the next couple of years. The thing about backups is you never know when you'll need one, so it comes down to how much having one around is worth to you. If you have the grip (they're cheap if you don't) you also have a camera that can do 8fps, significantly higher than anything short of a D700 or a single digit body can manage even today (and possibly why the D300s is still a current model in some markets). Combine that with image quality that is still excellent at middle ISOs (if you're not cropping too hard), and it's still a very capable body.</p> <p>As for storage, be careful with plastic bags and dessicants - only use a dessicant with indicator so it can be replaced or baked when exhausted. I suspect some types of polymer may react with the rubber grip material over time (I got 'sticky' grips after prolonged storage of a couple of Nikon bodies in a closed camera bag over time). In fact Nikon cautions against storing 'camera cases' in plastic bags in its own recommendations, which are worth a look:</p> <p>http://support.nikonusa.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/16567/~/caring-for-your-camera-equipment---part-i---proper-care-and-storage</p> <p>As Nikon notes, take out the battery for storage, but fire up the camera every month or so and excercise the shutter a few times.</p>

<p>The 'qualified purchases on 3rd party websites' thing doesn't apply here - that's about using Amazon Payments elsewhere (rather like Paypal). I'd assume this item is covered by the standard Amazon warranty, unless stated otherwise.</p> <p>Occasionally I do see 3rd party items listed on Amazon UK that explicitly aren't covered ('Not eligible for A-to-z Guarantee') - the vendors are effectively just using Amazon to advertise. In these cases you can't purchase via the Amazon website and 'add to basket' isn't available - instead you get a 'shop this website' external link (the example I just looked at doesn't even use Amazon Payments on the external site). The D750 listing isn't one of these, as 'add to cart' is available.</p> <p>The other thing to consider is that even if you have a 1 year warranty that is honoured by the vendor or Amazon, beyond this period you might be dealing with a grey market item that Nikon USA notoriously won't touch at any price.</p>

<p>The listing I see, B00PJ128K0, doesn't seem to mention 'refurbished' explicitly, but reading back through their (mostly good) feedback suggests that at least some of their stock is grey market (foreign manuals, etc.) or refurbished. One unhappy customer claims to have received a grey market D810 without it being clear that was what he was buying. The D750 has a '1 Year Limited USA Warranty', though that could mean anything (e.g. a vendor-supplied warranty).</p>

<blockquote> <p>Leica could consider, if they already have not, an upgradable camera. With the durable camera body, it would be reasonable that the electronics package and sensor could be replaced. If Leica thinks that people will replace cameras rather than upgrade, then they would not do it.</p> </blockquote> <p>The last Leica CEO to suggest this was promptly fired. To the user, it would make a lot of sense not to have an expensive optical rangefinder (housed in a body that's still engineered to last a lifetime) permanently wedded to a sensor package that will be obsolete in five years. To Leica, not so much. Far better, and more profitable, to sell you the complete package again next time.</p>

<p>Full marks to Herr Schopf for responding - will be interesting to hear what he has to say.</p>

<p>I'd be surprised if someone at Leica (probably not the CEO!) isn't already keeping an eye on sites like www.rangerfinderforum.com and (especially!) www.l-camera-forum.com. This might well have played a role in their existing response to the problem, which to me seems like a reasonable one (apart from the turnaround time for the fix). But then I don't have any of the affected cameras (and this issue does rather put me off getting one).</p>

<p>If budget is an issue, an M6 'classic' goes for about 60% of the price of an M7 where I live, which would give you quite a head start on paying for that lens. How important are AE mode and the other features to you?</p>

<p>I find my 'copy' of the supplied hood very solid - any blow severe enough to knock it off would probably transmit a pretty damaging force to the lens if it hit a metal screw on hood instead. I see from the other thread that Leica replaced your original hood, but it sounds like the problem may not be completely solved?</p>

<p>F801 - I have one. Nice viewfinder and build quality, but the AF isn't much good for anything that moves. No AF with AF-S lenses, no VR. Will meter with manual focus lenses. No aperture control for G lenses.</p> <p>F90 - Compared to F801, significantly better AF that will also work with AF-S lenses (though still just a single centre sensor) but no VR. Will meter with manual focus lenses. No aperture control for G lenses.</p> <p>F80 - Smaller and viewfinder not as good as F801 or F90, and will not meter with most manual focus lenses. However, you get the modern 2 dial interface that is fully compatible with G lenses, and it supports both AF-S and VR with a 5 point AF system. Not sure how its central cross-type sensor compares with the single sensor on the F90, though. I remember using the same AF module on the D70, and the central sensor seemed very good, but the peripheral line sensors weren't great.</p> <p>F100 - Does everything, including metering with manual lenses, AF-S and VR compatible. Excellent 5-point AF system by the standards of the time that still stands up well today. Very nice viewfinder and build quality, with the plastic back door latch the only significant weakness (early bodies also had a plastic rewind fork that was upgraded to metal in later production). Buy this in preference to all the others if you have the budget.</p>

<p>I've used CS2 under 8.1 x64 without too many issues. One slightly odd problem was that with display scaling set to 150%, mouse pointers showed up as barely usable triple images (the 'fix' is to set scaling to something like 149%). Not sure when this was corrected (it's fine in CS6).</p>

<p>I'll leave the debate about how seldom or often a protective filter should be used to others. When you do need one, I'd suggest:<br> <br />- Multicoating with a water-repellent layer. Multicoating helps a lot with flare, as the lenstip tests show. A water-repellent layer makes them much easier to clean. Hoya calls their latest water-repellent filters 'HD', which should be optically similar to Super HMC, but with the added advantage of easier maintenance. B+W's water-repellent filters are called 'MRC', or 'MRC nano' for the very latest version. I have a couple of B+W MRC filters and find them much easier to clean than, say, Hoya Pro-1 filters (which are Super HMC without the repellent layer).</p> <p>- Maybe a slim mount, to reduce the chance of vignetting. I suspect you'd be fine even with a standard mount at 24mm (unless you stack filters), but a slim mount will definitely be fine. The Hoya HD filters are all slim. The B+W version is called 'XS-Pro Digital'. Both of these also have front threads to allow stacking filters or lens caps (though be careful to make sure the clips on your cap don't touch and scratch the filter). B+W also make very thin 'Slim-Line' mounts, but these don't have front threads (and are overkill for a 24mm).</p>

<blockquote> <p>The price differences in the 2nd hand market between either end of the ocean are just absurd.... Over here, a F80 would cost about 5-6 times what a F65 costs. If the price difference is that little, then yes, by all means a N80 is much nicer.</p> </blockquote> <p>To be fair, the price at one dealer in the UK (only a small body of water away from the rest of Europe!) is £39 right now, while you can pick up an F65 for under £15 if you shop around. But £39 is stil less than a high end UV filter, and you're getting a camera that once went for >£300.</p>

<blockquote> <p>I would rather recommend the N80 than the N65 or N75 because it's much nicer and yet not that much more expensive. I have run across real good condition one for $40. The next one up the F100 is at least $200.</p> </blockquote> <p>I'd agree. There's nothing wrong with cheaper and slightly smaller cameras like the N65/F65 and N75/F75, but with the N80/F80 available for the price of a media card it's really a no-brainer, and you benefit from the front command dial that the F75 and lower models lack. The (larger, heavier) F100 is really great, and an excellent bargain at today's prices, but still a fair bit more expensive.</p> <p>For maximum compatibility between an N80 and a D5100, buy lenses with 'AF-S', but NOT 'DX', in their names. These will autofocus on both cameras, and cover the full 35mm frame on the N80. However, 'non-AF-S' lenses like the 28-80 AF-D and (even better) the 28-105 AF-D can make good, cheap standard autofocus lenses for the N80 (they'll also work on the 5100, but not autofocus).</p>

<blockquote> <p>In addition, have the code to your website modified to prevent hotlinking.</p> </blockquote> <p>Why? Hotlinking is not infringement. Blocking it probably make infringement more likely. Or is that the plan, to increase enforcement revenue?</p>

<p>I wonder how many film cameras Leica actually sells a year? At £3100-£3600 for the off the shelf models, or about 4x the price of a decent M6, I'd hazard a guess it can't be that many! Are we even talking thousands, nowadays? And that's for a product where most of the R&D was done decades ago. Even without Jim's definitive statement, it couldn't possibly be financially viable for them to develop a scanner from scratch, and there's no high quality current model from anyone else they could re-badge (or we wouldn't be having this discussion). Whether we like it or not, Leica is primarily a digital photography company in 2014. But it would be interesting to see if someone with, say, a Kickstarter business plan could approach a company like Konica-Minolta with a view to licensing the technology and getting a modern scanner made. Probably equally unlikely, but crazier things have happened (Ferrania, the Impossible Project, etc.).</p>