Nikon film camera query.

So I just got the F60 delivered and it has a heavy front focusing issue. Checking with the supplier if they can replace it with another similar body. Guess my film camera body experience has just started?
 
ashishtamhane said:
So I just got the F60 delivered and it has a heavy front focusing issue. Checking with the supplier if they can replace it with another similar body. Guess my film camera body experience has just started?
Click to expand...

I'm intrigued to know how you tested it so quickly, or was that plain through the viewfinder? Is there doptre adjustment, and have you set it up for yourself?
 
ancient_mariner said:
I'm intrigued to know how you tested it so quickly, or was that plain through the viewfinder? Is there doptre adjustment, and have you set it up for yourself?
Click to expand...
It’s plain through the viewfinder. Diopter adjustment makes it worse.

It’s either a wonky AF motor or mirror alignment issue. Tried with different lenses too.
 
I know I keep harping on about this and that, and I know that you want what you want, but if you want a Nikon SLR the manual focusing on the Nikon non AF SLR cameras is so easy, it's almost quicker than AF and sometimes quicker - and with these "older" cameras the more "advanced" they are the more likely you will have problems, once the "electrics" go they are "dead" - all mine need some form of light seal replacing, mirror/focusing screen needs cleaning and the shutter speeds need testing ........plus plus ........ every time I think about using them I'm just put off - so if I do take film, which is very rarely, I prefer the much simpler RF cameras
 
BillN_33 said:
, but if you want a Nikon SLR the manual focusing on the Nikon non AF SLR cameras is so easy,
Click to expand...
Yeah let’s see where I end up with this.

So I set the focus marker on the lens to infinity and it’s still blurred in the viewfinder. Infinity comes into focus at about the 7 to 10 feet marker.

Viewfinder or focusing screen issue?
 
ashishtamhane said:
Yeah let’s see where I end up with this.

So I set the focus marker on the lens to infinity and it’s still blurred in the viewfinder. Infinity comes into focus at about the 7 to 10 feet marker.

Viewfinder or focusing screen issue?
Click to expand...

do you have a manual focus lens?
 
It sounds like the focus screen is out of position. Sounds simple to fix but actually isn't! This assumes it's not user error of course, not saying it is but watching from the side lines one can't rule it out.

The F60 should be super cheap often found on ebay for £20-£30. £75 (with no battery) seems optimistic.
I made a video about the F60 if that would be of interest to you?
As for "old mechanical cameras never die etc etc" You do you. I can buy about ten or fifteen F60's for the going rate of an FM2. GIvern most of them still work after twenty years I'm not worried about reliability. If someone wants an FM2 that's fine to, it's all personal choice. I actually like the F50 but mostly because of the novelty factor. I recently got an F70 as well which has a few more features but I haven't used it yet.
 
Good luck with your F60. Your thread prompted me to dig out my F70 and have a go.
 
Last edited:
My first camera was an F75 so pretty similar to the F60.

Made alright images but thoroughly uninspiring to use. Very light (maybe a good thing) and plasticky feeling (definitely not a good thing).

I guess if you want autofocus your going to have to choose between cheap and platic or a more pro level model that's going to be a lot dearer. I later had an F100 which was a much nicer camera to hold and use.
 
No_Photoh said:
I guess if you want autofocus your going to have to choose between cheap and platic or a more pro level model that's going to be a lot dearer. I later had an F100 which was a much nicer camera to hold and use.
Click to expand...
The F60 was good enough for my needs but this particular model seems to have an issue with the focusing screen. I am returning it for a F90x.
 
That looks very nice. Is it the actual one you bought? I assume you know that you will need the electronic release if you use the camera on a tripod. The original Nikon ones are getting hard to find, but there are after market ones (sold be Wex) that do the job for less than half the price.
 
Rodinal said:
That looks very nice. Is it the actual one you bought? I assume you know that you will need the electronic release if you use the camera on a tripod. The original Nikon ones are getting hard to find, but there are after market ones (sold be Wex) that do the job for less than half the price.
Click to expand...
Yes it is. It feels not old honestly.

Although I don’t think I will be using this on a tripod why is it so?
 
ashishtamhane said:
Yes it is. It feels not old honestly.

Although I don’t think I will be using this on a tripod why is it so?
Click to expand...

Probably because there's no cable release. If you don't have a remote release it can be done with self-timer. This assumes your reason to use a tripod is to allow longer shutter times, rather than simply because you want to work on a tripod.
 
There is an old story about lens quality. One of the main reasons why people claim a lens s 'not up to much' is due to camera shake. Whenever I can use a tripod conveniently, I use one. (Manfrotto 55B) Even a budget lens will give you surprisingly sharp images just because it is being held still on a tripod and a traditional cable or modern electronic release is used.
 
Last edited:
Rodinal said:
There is an old story about lens quality. One of the main reasons why people claim a lens s 'not up to much' is due to camera shake. Whenever I can use a tripod conveniently, I use one. (Manfrotto 99B) Even a budget lens will give you surprisingly sharp images just because it is being held still on a tripod and a traditional cable or modern electronic release is used.
Click to expand...
My head knows you're right, my heart says see, frame, meter, focus, breathe, take, move!

Generally speaking, I think my images are limited by my composition rather than sharpness, at least for my purposes (which in the end are the ones that count). I know some others find the process of setup and careful checking of a composition is a really important part of their process, but I find it really limiting. Part of why I gave up on LF.
 
Image stabilisation and keeping a decently high shutter speed helped kill off that idea from the days of ISO50 film. ;) And modern lenses have helped show up just how poor some of the older film lenses were (and they were, although some were good too).

However if someone shakes a bit then a tripod is probably a good idea with a film camera. I like a tripod for long exposure, but otherwise not so much unless shooting groups of people, where it provides a fixed point for their attention.
 
Rodinal said:
There is an old story about lens quality. One of the main reasons why people claim a lens s 'not up to much' is due to camera shake. Whenever I can use a tripod conveniently, I use one. (Manfrotto 99B) Even a budget lens will give you surprisingly sharp images just because it is being held still on a tripod and a traditional cable or modern electronic release is used.
Click to expand...
Nikon AF-D lenses are pretty much sharp for me.

Agreed on budget lenses sharpness. Most of the time it’s our lack of technique rather than lens performance for the reason of lack of sharpness.
 
I have a Nikon 35/70 F3.3 lens which is as sharp as I will ever need and an absolute cracker if used with a camera on a tripod Cheap as chips and really light weight,
 
Last edited:
Some Nikon lenses are not well thought of such as the 24/120 F3.5/5.6 and the 24/85 F2.8. I don't have a comparison for the latter but the first lens was actually quite poor and not really sharp at any focal length or aperture The F4 constant aperture version is something quite different, but costs about 3 times as much! I bought a used one and it cost more than a new, but less well specified 3.5/5.6 version. It is the best lens I have.

The 70/300 AFD was an oddity as well. Mostly they are sharp but you will find that at certain focal lengths/apertures there will be patches of the image that are seemingly out of focus or to describe it correctly where parts of 'the image gets distorted' compared to the rest of the frame. It can be very noticeable when straight lines are in the frame. Oddly though it is apparently the same optical design as a Tamron 70/300 F3,5/5.6 ED from about 15 years ago which didn't appear have the same problem!

The much older 'E' series manual focus lenses were not considered to be very good either. I have used a couple of them (35mm and 135mm) and had no problem. Lighter in weight certainly and lighter on the wallet as well. It seems this reputation came about because it was 'rumoured' that not all of the internal elements were coated.
 
Last edited:
Rodinal said:
Some Nikon lenses are not well thought of such as the 24/120 F3.5/5.6
Click to expand...

If you think that one is bad, try the 28-200.

I had a D610 for a few years, and generally I found Nikon's non-professional lenses to be inferior to equivalent era Minolta lenses. Some were fine, and Nikon's plastic fantastic economy series were actually better than the equivalent Minolta's, but the enthusiast models seemed less good.
 
BillN_33 said:
I have a F80, New in box, but I think it's gone all sticky - plus my user F80 which is black, but same problem

TP_F80_New_in_box.jpg
Click to expand...
You can get rid of the 'stickyness' by wiping the affected parts gently with a soft cloth moistened with Isopropyl Alcohol. Let it dry - it will only take seconds and do it again and let it dry properly. I have done this with both F80's and F100's and the stickyness rarely returns.
 
Rodinal said:
Some Nikon lenses are not well thought of such as the 24/120 F3.5/5.6 and the 24/85 F2.8. I don't have a comparison for the latter but the first lens was actually quite poor and not really sharp at any focal length or aperture The F4 constant aperture version is something quite different, but costs about 3 times as much! I bought a used one and it cost more than a new, but less well specified 3.5/5.6 version. It is the best lens I have.

The 70/300 AFD was an oddity as well. Mostly they are sharp but you will find that at certain focal lengths/apertures there will be patches of the image that are seemingly out of focus or to describe it correctly where parts of 'the image gets distorted' compared to the rest of the frame. It can be very noticeable when straight lines are in the frame. Oddly though it is apparently the same optical design as a Tamron 70/300 F3,5/5.6 ED from about 15 years ago which didn't appear have the same problem!

The much older 'E' series manual focus lenses were not considered to be very good either. I have used a couple of them (35mm and 135mm) and had no problem. Lighter in weight certainly and lighter on the wallet as well. It seems this reputation came about because it was 'rumoured' that not all of the internal elements were coated.
Click to expand...

AAMOI this guy's thoughts/tests of Nikon lenses:-
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top