Tag: Nikon (page 1 of 3)

Nikon F2A

I have now gone an entire year without buying a camera – impressive. My last purchase, almost a year ago to the day, was something of an impulse buy. We had visitors in town at the time and I and some of my colleagues were assigned as their minders. On the agenda was a courtesy call with some VIPs. Naturally, we were not in the room and as time passed it became clear that the VIPs and and our guests were getting along nicely. We drank coffee and played with our phones. I happened to take a look at the Used Photo Pro website, something I do most days.

From time to time a camera shows up there that I’m convinced I must have. I’m sure I’ve hit the ‘buy’ button and started filling in my details half a dozen times before talking myself back from the edge. This time I jumped. A Nikon F2A, black, and in great condition. Who could resist?

Nico van Dijk’s F2 serial number matrix dates my camera to 1974, between August and October. This would imply that the head that came with the camera is  not the original, since the DP-11 head that makes this an F2A was designed to work with AI lenses which only appeared in 1977. The DP-11 uses CdS cells for metering and has a simple swinging needle display. I had read, while waiting impatiently for the camera to arrive, that the needle in these heads can sometimes be quite jumpy but on mine it moves very smoothly. I also noticed that the light seals, while not perfect, are in better condition than I would have expected for a 45 year old camera. I suspect that either the camera has been very well looked after or has been serviced at some point. I didn’t need another camera but sitting next to my FM2n and collection of Nikkor lenses it looks rather well.

Unfortunately the dark nights, work and then COVID-19 conspired to keep the camera on the shelf most of the time, but here are some shots from the first roll I put through it back in March last year. I happened to have a couple of rolls of Kodak Ultramax 400, a film I had never previously used, so it was also an opportunity to try it out. I brought my 24 and 105 Nikkors, starting with the former and swapping half way through.

With limited time and a primary goal of ensuring that my F2 was in full working order I chose to visit familiar and favourite sites in downtown Sofia. First, the former Royal Palace, now the National Gallery. I managed to forget that I was shooting with a manual camera, so put the camera to my eye, framed and pressed the button. Once it dawned on my what I had done and I finished cursing my own stupidity I reframed, adjusted exposure and took another shot.

Just past the National Gallery is the Russian Orthodox Church, properly known as the Church of St Nicholas the Miracle-Maker. It’s highly photogenic but I have yet to get a picture of it that I think does it justice. The first one below was taken with the 24mm lens, the second one with the 105mm.

Next up is the spectacular Alexander Nevsky Cathedral of the Bulgarian Orthodox Church. This is another building I photograph a lot with out ever being entirely happy with the results, but I keep trying. I used around one third of the roll shooting the cathedral. Here is a wide shot of the whole building and some detail from the beautifully elaborate roof.

This sculpture below commemorates Stefan Stambolov who fought for Bulgarian independence from the Ottoman Empire and went on to become the country’s ninth Prime Minister. The cleavage in the upper part of the sculpture references Stambolov’s assassination when his killers, knowing that Stambolov wore an armoured vest, struck his head repeatedly with knives and fractured his skull. Stambolov died a few days later.

Probably my favourite building in the city is the Ivan Vazov National Theatre which stands in a pedestrianised square by a small park known as the City Garden – a beautiful building in a beautiful setting. I took six pictures of the theatre. Here they are.

On to the City Museum, formerly the public baths, and the nearby mineral springs. This is the point at which I switched from the 24 to the 105 with the first two shots taken with the former. I used the 105 for a closer look at the beautiful detail on the exterior of the building and for the two candid shots.

And finally, this is the head of a large sculpture of a lion at the Memorial to the Unknown Soldier which is visible in the background. This is quite a tricky shot to get because normally Sofia’s kids are clambering all over the lion. I think I waited about fifteen minutes before there was a brief lull. I wasn’t convinced at the time that it was worth the wait but I’m quite pleased with the way it turned out.

The F2 performed perfectly throughout and the results suggest the metering and shutter speeds are accurate. While it is a big, heavy camera I did not find it to be uncomfortable to carry or handle. I appreciated the large, clear viewfinder and the simple but functional and uncluttered display – shutter speed, aperture and simple swinging needle.

As for Kodak Ultramax, this film was a very pleasant surprise. It’s not nearly as grainy as I expected and the colours are nicely saturated without being excessive. It does have a tendency towards a certain ‘creaminess’, particularly with white tones, but it’s not unpleasant. I tend to view white balance as an aesthetic rather than a technical criterion being primarily a matter of taste. My own personal taste tends towards a more neutral rendering so the only real adjustments I made to these images in Lightroom was to tweak the white balance. Most of the images above got a minus adjustment on temperature (mostly in the -4 to -8 range) and a plus adjustment on tint (between +6 and +12). Overall, though, for a consumer grade and very affordable film it delivered impressive results. This is definitely one I will use again.

For more on the F2 here are a few reviews from Casual Photophile, Emulsive, Dan Schneider and Jim Grey. And here is a video walk through with Travis Mortz. Finally, here is Nikon’s own brief history of the F2’s development and launch.

Three Years with Film

A little over three years ago I took the plunge and ordered a Nikon FM2n and five rolls of Ilford HP5+. At the time I was open to the possibility that I might lose interest after six months but I still have my FM2n plus a few other film cameras and still enjoy shooting with them though I still use my digital cameras regularly as well. In those three years I have come to a few conclusions about my approach to film photography. Here they are in no particular order.

First, I’m a 35mm SLR bloke. I tried a few rangefinders along the way – a couple of Konicas and a Yashica – and have occasionally been tempted to try medium format but I have ended up with three main cameras all of them 35mm SLRs. The rangefinders are fun little cameras but I prefer the size, adaptability and solidity of SLRs.

Second, I like classic 1970’s SLRs. I tried a couple of newer models – the Nikon F100 and F75 – but I preferred a more hands on approach and concluded that if I was going to use an auto-everything camera I would go with a digital model. That my preferred digital camera, the Fujifilm X-T2, is as well built as the F100 and a lot better built than most film SLRs from the 1980’s onwards only confirmed this for me. There is an element of nostalgia to this as well since I was a teenager in the late 1970’s just developing an interest in photography and the SLRs I now own are all cameras I dreamed of back then but could never afford.

Third, I don’t really care about data. When I first loaded a scanned negative into Lightroom the emptiness of the Metadata panel unnerved me. I started trying to work out how best to record data manually and organise it in Lightroom and physically in a film archive. I even wrote an article about it for the Emulsive website. Now? I don’t really care. Camera, film, lens (though sometimes I forget to note this) and the approximate date is all I record. The rest is detail.

Fourth, I don’t feel the need to archive my negatives. I started out keeping them all but then reasoned that since some or most of the pictures were rubbish and not worth five minutes to scan why should I keep the negatives? Also, I don’t do this with my RAW files. So now I just keep negatives for the pictures I like and bin the rest. These negatives still need a little organisation so I can find them again but I keep it simple – year and roll number.

Fifth, the process is more important than the outcome. Truth be told if I never take another shot on film worth publishing or printing I would still go out and shoot. I find film photography with mostly manual cameras and a limit of 36 shots therapeutic. The pleasure is in the process of shooting rather than the creation of pleasing images. The latter is a bonus but nothing more. When the outcome is important I use my Fujifilm digital cameras.

Sixth, and following on from the previous point, I have no interest in developing or printing my own film. I can understand that this might be a critical part of the process when the outcome – the final negative or the final print – matters more but for me the pleasure is being out with the camera taking pictures.

If you would like to see the bonus pictures that I do think are worth keeping you can find them all in my Granularity category.