|
|
Post by kiev4a on Sept 6, 2006 12:58:12 GMT -5
Recently acquired two Nikon Fs--one with the TN finder and the other with the newer, auto indexing FTn finder.
The camera with the TN finder is great except the film counter doesn't work. The camera with the FTn finder is in good shape, however the meter readings are erratic. So:
I put the TN finder on the newer Ftn body giving me one fully operational model with working meter. The FTn finder won't fit the older body with the inoperative counter because the front Nikon nameplate on the body isn't notched so the front claws on the finder can get a grip. The earlier TN finder doesn't care about notches because it doesn't have the front grippers. This explanation probably doesn't make much sense to a non Nikon person.
Anyway, now I have one fully operation F.
Eventually, I will get the film counter and the FTn finder working and can put everything back in it's proper place.
|
|
|
|
Post by philmco on Sept 6, 2006 14:32:39 GMT -5
Wayne
Of course the "F" can be operated without any finder at all. Great for low down macro work that way.
It is interesting how Nikon could make fairly (IMO) substantial changes to the F and yet still call it the same camera - it even ended up as the Apollo model while the F2 was first being made.
Were there other cameras (manufacturers) that did similar things to their top-of the line units? The F4 was probably the last Nikon to have this sort of treatment - mainly with the power units.
Phil
|
|
|
|
Post by kiev4a on Sept 6, 2006 15:28:24 GMT -5
Phil:
Yep the waist level finder was pretty much just a top cover for the viewing screen. You could use the camera without a meter or prism. Now the non metered prisms cost as much as a camera.
The changes in the F, other than the meter heads, were fairly minor. There were some changes in the construction of the advance lever--including the Apollo tip. and the notching of the nameplate for the FTn grippers. I guess some of the really early Fs had cloth shutters.
There were some changes made in the F4 but most would be even harder than the F changes to identify--the grip, the way the prism latched--I think the shutter speed knob was enlarged or raised, too.
|
|
|
|
Post by philmco on Sept 8, 2006 9:04:00 GMT -5
Wayne
I hear you about the price of a plain prism! I have never picked one up because of that. They do make the camera look much more trim.
The changes to the appearance of the "F" over it's lifetime are such that I doubt the uninitiated would even recognize it as the same camera if comparing an early "1964 red dot F" with plain prism to a 1972 Apollo FTn. Some of the prisms are not even interchangeable without machining. Which apparently Nikon would do.
And this seemed to be normal practice for Nikon in those days.
I am not aware of any other maker (I am sure there must be some) who undertook such changes with a model yet called it the same camera.
Phil
|
|
|
|
Post by kiev4a on Sept 8, 2006 10:46:04 GMT -5
The Nikon has been amazing in that even with autofocus, improved metering, and digital, it still is using the same lens mount used on the original "F".
|
|
|
|
Post by kiev4a on Sept 10, 2006 11:08:35 GMT -5
Brian: I checked the lug and the shaft that goes up through the take-up spool to the counter. I suspect it is the spring in the counter advance mechanism itself--or the piece that engages the counter gear. I'm a little nervous about digging into that portion as I have read that the spring can go flying off in unexpected directions. A good winter project.
|
|
