Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/12/18
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]At 02:05 PM 12/18/97 -0500, you wrote: >Frankly, I don't think Nikon can afford to build cameras like the F in the >1990's. Incidentally, the back and bottom plate comes off the F in one piece. After owning and using an F5 professionally, I'd say it blows the F away. Not only in terms of ruggedness, ease of use, but in terms of raw performance. The F can only dream of the things the F5 does with ease. And most photographers I know were glad the whole motor/bottom/back doesn't come off the F cameras from the F2 on. The FM is a very nice camera but saying its the contiunuation of the F tradition ignores the vastly better F2/3/4/5. It's light, for sure. Many of my colleges use them for one reason. To save money up for an F5. Okay, so there's the manual shutter. Not as accurate, except when the battery dependent cameras lose power. Then the FM is much more accurate! ;-) ========== Eric Welch St. Joseph, MO http://www.ponyexpress.net/~ewelch Men say they know many things; but lo! they have taken wings The arts and sciences, and a thousand appliances The wind that blows is all that any body knows. -Thoreau