I think they went to the Super-8 days for that design inspiration
From my "Complete Nikon System" book.
George
pbraymond wrote:
...The Nikon mirrorless aesthetics are even worse IMHO, the Z5/6/7 "prism" housing is just ugly in my opinion, especially how the "prism" housing terminates...
pbraymond wrote:
Ahh, the F5, what memories. I think I still have a couple of 4-pack AA lithiums somewhere in the house :-) I think Nikon used the F5 to prep their users for the upcoming battery sucking digital cameras!. The F5 was my favorite film AF body, but I ended up using the F100 more simply because it was smaller and lighter. Just had to manage mirror vibration.
I'm surprised to see that the single digit D's are larger than the F5. I would have expected the opposite.
I agree with Leighton that the change to digital has resulted in less aesthetically pleasing camera designs (and lens designs too I might add). The Nikon mirrorless aesthetics are even worse IMHO, the Z5/6/7 "prism" housing is just ugly in my opinion, especially how the "prism" housing terminates with that odd cutout that seems to serve no function other than to highlight the larger Z-mount opening. This has carried over to the new Z9 as well. I get it Nikon, you have a new mount that has opened up a lot of possibilities.
On a more positive note, the Z lenses seem to have stepped up optical performance by a fair amount, so kudos where it is due....Show more →
Although I understand why they changed their mount, I still prefer the old F-mount lenses better. Looks wise, anyway.
OffTrail wrote:
Oh yeah, for handling, Nikon knocked it out of the park. It feels more dense and compact, buttons are right where you expect them, and even the rubber, twenty years later, feels better to me than the D5/D3s/D2x. And that red strip where your fingertips sit, that feels softer than anything else on the camera which offers a totally different tactile experience than the modern bodies.
I like the "v" shape that's on the top of the D5, D3, D500, etc., it's sporty, but I agree. The F5 has immensely classic looks. And no worries on the name, I've not shared it ...Show more →
If Curtis was around, he'd say "we're on a first name basis on this thread". Sooo...
GeorgeBo wrote:
I think they went to the Super-8 days for that design inspiration
Great connection there George. Everything old is new again!
leighton w wrote:
Although I understand why they changed their mount, I still prefer the old F-mount lenses better. Looks wise, anyway.
Same here Leighton. I guess that's one reason we are all here, using the old lenses with damped focus rings and aperture rings is a pleasure. And the visual stimulus provided by the old designs, focus and DOF scales, and even the multicolor aperture numbers are fun. One undeniable advantage to the old lenses is that there's a place to properly grip the lens when mounting and unmounting from the camera body (or simply to remove the rear lens cap). The Z's are terrible at this.
leighton w wrote:
Looks like an antique, but it was released in 1973. Damn I feel old.
Leighton, in my line of work, any thing over 50 years old is automatically screened for potential historical significance. I think a lot of people on this thread qualify.
pbraymond wrote:
Same here Leighton. I guess that's one reason we are all here, using the old lenses with damped focus rings and aperture rings is a pleasure. And the visual stimulus provided by the old designs, focus and DOF scales, and even the multicolor aperture numbers are fun. One undeniable advantage to the old lenses is that there's a place to properly grip the lens when mounting and unmounting from the camera body (or simply to remove the rear lens cap). The Z's are terrible at this.
Makes me think about getting a Nikon f-mount body just to have.
On vacation my D610 IR fell out of a security locker from about 2 feet.
You will be pleased to know that no manual focus lenses were damaged The 18-35G took the brunt.
The UV filter got smashed up. I can't say if the lens is now compromised since I am still on vacation and having to do detailed testing on.
The D610's mirror only goes half-way. The camera still takes images but 50% of the frame is blackened due to the mirror issue.
So, anyone come across this?
If anybody out there has a D600 or D610 could you take a detailed images of the mirror box with the mirror in the up and resting positions? I need a reference point. I can see a small metal oval washer thing on the back left hand edge of the box that doesn't look right. In the resting position I can also see faint ghosting thru the viewfinder. Something (probably the mirror) is ever so slightly out of alignment.
I am hoping that a quick dis-assembly will reveal an obvious and easy fix.
Until someone with a 610 replies, take a look and see if it matches up with a Df. Maybe the control arm for the secondary mirror jarred off the fixed point.
Does your mirror look like the one below?
DeltaSigma wrote:
Help required!
On vacation my D610 IR fell out of a security locker from about 2 feet.
You will be pleased to know that no manual focus lenses were damaged The 18-35G took the brunt.
The UV filter got smashed up. I can't say if the lens is now compromised since I am still on vacation and having to do detailed testing on.
The D610's mirror only goes half-way. The camera still takes images but 50% of the frame is blackened due to the mirror issue.
So, anyone come across this?
If anybody out there has a D600 or D610 could you take a detailed images of the mirror box with the mirror in the up and resting positions? I need a reference point. I can see a small metal oval washer thing on the back left hand edge of the box that doesn't look right. In the resting position I can also see faint ghosting thru the viewfinder. Something (probably the mirror) is ever so slightly out of alignment.
I am hoping that a quick dis-assembly will reveal an obvious and easy fix.
On vacation my D610 IR fell out of a security locker from about 2 feet.
You will be pleased to know that no manual focus lenses were damaged The 18-35G took the brunt.
The UV filter got smashed up. I can't say if the lens is now compromised since I am still on vacation and having to do detailed testing on.
The D610's mirror only goes half-way. The camera still takes images but 50% of the frame is blackened due to the mirror issue.
So, anyone come across this?
If anybody out there has a D600 or D610 could you take a detailed images of the mirror box with the mirror in the up and resting positions? I need a reference point. I can see a small metal oval washer thing on the back left hand edge of the box that doesn't look right. In the resting position I can also see faint ghosting thru the viewfinder. Something (probably the mirror) is ever so slightly out of alignment.
I am hoping that a quick dis-assembly will reveal an obvious and easy fix.
On vacation my D610 IR fell out of a security locker from about 2 feet.
You will be pleased to know that no manual focus lenses were damaged The 18-35G took the brunt.
The UV filter got smashed up. I can't say if the lens is now compromised since I am still on vacation and having to do detailed testing on.
The D610's mirror only goes half-way. The camera still takes images but 50% of the frame is blackened due to the mirror issue.
So, anyone come across this?
If anybody out there has a D600 or D610 could you take a detailed images of the mirror box with the mirror in the up and resting positions? I need a reference point. I can see a small metal oval washer thing on the back left hand edge of the box that doesn't look right. In the resting position I can also see faint ghosting thru the viewfinder. Something (probably the mirror) is ever so slightly out of alignment.
I am hoping that a quick dis-assembly will reveal an obvious and easy fix.
Colin, I hope you can sort out the 610 mirror easily - like that video. I had my D300 jump under my falling body with the 70-200 f2.8 afs vr attached - lens was fine but Nikon claimed "impact damage" - like a grown man falling on a little old camera would "crack the mount"...sheesh.
Jim
Revisited Iris flowers, because I never seem to be happy with the attempts I have made in the past; and George seemed to nail it from the getgo using narrow DOF. Yes, they all are the same clump of flowers that my wife gave me. The 200mm seems to add a 3D quality that is stronger than the 105mm - even when wide open.
5DS-R and 200mm f2.0 ai @ f2.0
D800 with the 105mm f1.8 ais and modified TC-16A @ f4
