Nikon F3 owners, speak up!

[Kiron Kid]

I just realized how much heavier my F3 with the MD-4 (lithium AA cells for weight reduction) is than my F100 (6 rechargeable AA Eneloop cells) is. However, I do tend to use older, heavier lenses on the F3...

 

[pendennis]

My F3HP is a handful especially with the MD-4 attached. However, a number of years ago, I used one for a trip to San Francisco, and used it detached. While I had been spoiled by the MD-4, I found it a great, compact camera, and it yielded some of the best Ektachrome I'd ever shot. I only used Nikkor primes; 20mm, 24mm, 50mm, 105mm, 180mm, and 300mm lenses. Fortunately, the weather cooperated, and no fog.

I still use one, although I like my FM2 and FE variations, also.

 

[compur]

The F3 was so popular Nikon had to continue making them throughout the entire production run of its successor, the F4, and well into the production run of the F5.

 

[Derrel]

The F3 was so popular Nikon had to continue making them throughout the entire production run of its successor, the F4, and well into the production run of the F5.

I know that the F3 was the longest-running camera model Nikon has ever made...wasn't it nineteen years straight that he F3 was offered as part of the Nikon lineup?

 

[compur]

... unless you count the FM10.

(Those who wish to inform me the FM10 isn't really a Nikon may now begin typing.)

 

[cgw]

The F3 was so popular Nikon had to continue making them throughout the entire production run of its successor, the F4, and well into the production run of the F5.

That's a bit of a stretch. The F3 wasn't selling strongly once AF got traction in the early 90s. Cameras like the N90s, whose fast AF and TTL flash abilities, out-performed it--and the F4. Recall being told by Nikon.ca techs that F3 production had ended in the mid-90s. Remaining inventories slowly sold down. Parts were running low in the early 'oos. They were collecting dust at that time at retailers who rarely discounted them.

 

[MartinCrabtree]

Nothing you can say will diminish the impact of the Nikon F3. Not an owner however there's no denying greatness.

 

[compur]

There is nothing unusual about production of a Nikon (or any major brand) model ending before that model is removed as a current offering. All models have a sales curve and production of all models normally ceases some time prior to their removal as a current product. In the case of the F3 that interval was simply longer than with nearly all of their other models.

It's not so easy to decide when to discontinue an F-series camera because it isn't only the camera that is being discontinued but also the entire system -- finders, backs, motor drives, flash units, etc, etc. And, the transition from MF to AF pro-level cameras was a difficult period in the industry that only the strongest manufacturers survived.

BTW, at about the same time the F3 was finally dropped, Nikon brought out another new “old technology” model, the FM3A, and continued it for yet another 5 years despite its “old fashioned” manual focus and less-than-leading-edge specs. I suspect Nikon didn't do that on a whim but rather because they recognized, due to the F3's popularity, that manual focus cameras still filled a need for serious photographers.

 

[jcdeboever]

... unless you count the FM10.

(Those who wish to inform me the FM10 isn't really a Nikon may now begin typing.)

Ok, Cosina

 

[cgw]

There is nothing unusual about production of a Nikon (or any major brand) model ending before that model is removed as a current offering. All models have a sales curve and production of all models normally ceases some time prior to their removal as a current product. In the case of the F3 that interval was simply longer than with nearly all of their other models.

It's not so easy to decide when to discontinue an F-series camera because it isn't only the camera that is being discontinued but also the entire system -- finders, backs, motor drives, flash units, etc, etc. And, the transition from MF to AF pro-level cameras was a difficult period in the industry that only the strongest manufacturers survived.

BTW, at about the same time the F3 was finally dropped, Nikon brought out another new “old technology” model, the FM3A, and continued it for yet another 5 years despite its “old fashioned” manual focus and less-than-leading-edge specs. I suspect Nikon didn't do that on a whim but rather because they recognized, due to the F3's popularity, that manual focus cameras still filled a need for serious photographers.

The F3 had a solid decade of sales but not much more. Accessory sales slowed faster than camera sales. It was never a prosumer camera. The FM3a was a pricey flop. Nikon dithered about rolling out “chipped” MF Nikkors in classic focal lengths to accompany it—28/2.8, 45/2.8 and 105/2.5. Only the 45/2.8 Ai-P made it to market. As a sales dud, the FMa indeed showed the popularity of MF cameras among photographers at that time—serious or otherwise.

 

[Derrel]

I thought the FM3a was actually a camera designed to show Nikon's prowess as a camera maker, sort of the way the F6 was. The Nikon F6 was a true sales dud; a 35mm film SLR released after the digital SLR had basically all but killed the 35mm film camera, in all brands, the F6 sold exceptionally poorly. The F6 sold so poorly that I have never even SEEN one in real life, either on the street, or at my favorite camera shop, where all types of new and used cameras turn up.

I recall a conversation at ProPhoto Supply, with a sales associate, Karen, around 2003 or 2004. She told me that with surprising frequency, they would have customers who would come in, very much insistent upon buying a Nikon F3. She told me that even though the camera was "outdated", that there were a surprising number of people who fit that mold, of wanting specifically, the Nikon F3. I "get" that.

The thing about the F3 is this: even though it needs battery power to have the full range of shutter speeds, the built-in light meter has proven to be exceptionally rugged. On the other hand, the people who tout the "reliability" of the F and F2 seem to want to ignore the fact that a HUGE number of the light meters in the interchangeable prisms of those two cameras were dead after a mere five to 10 years of use; even back in the mid-1980's, mid- to late-19709's Photomic prisms often had a dead light meter. So much for "reliability". The F3 on the other hand, has proven to be extremely reliable, both in meter and shutter. And even though it felt a bit "flimsy" to me on the manual film advance's feel, F3's seem to still be working pretty well. The integration of the MD-4 motor drive to the body was nice, and slicker, than the old F2 motor system...less kludgy, more modern,more an integral part of the system than an add-on. I dunno...I owned three F2A's and a F2ASb, a rare variant...nice enough cameras, but still, they lacked Aperture priority auto, lacked TTL flash control and flash metering, and had less-accurate, mechanically-timed shutters. As one poster put it, the F3 spanned one era and another era...it was the last manual focus professional-grade (1-digit) Nikon body...at the time, it seemed a bit small, a bit "different" from the earlier F and F2 series bodies, but the design and styling were newer, and better-integrated with modern camera making methods and with the idea of making a RELIABLE light meter that was inside the camera body, and not inside of a Photomic head that was huge and heavy and old-school in styling.

Pro camera repairman Marty Forscher told Modern Photography's Herb Keppler that the F had 974 parts, in total, while the F2 had around 1,500 parts, and that as a consequence of the 50 percent higher parts total, the original Nikon F was _VASTLY_ more-reliable than the Nikon F2. Forscher repaired top professional shooters' gear for well over 30 years in NYC, and was considered the best-known camera repairman in North America for many years.

But back to the FM3a: the Pentax LX of the late 1970's-early 1980's was a contemporary of the Nikon F3. The Pentax had a shutter that offered both electronically timed and mechanically timed shutter speeds. And that was the feature I think Nikon felt they needed to produce in a production camera, just as a way to satisfy their engineering departments pride. Nikon is a company that has a good deal of company pride, and which seems to produce some products that, I and others think, are designed to satisfy senior company engineers, rather than being based on what the camera buying public and Nikon customers say they want. Satisfying internal, Nikon executive "company pride" is why the FM3a and the F6 were released; both cameras came at a time when sales of 35mm film SLR's were very poor.

 

[cgw]

My only beef with F3 is the tendency for the contrast to drop on the teensy meter LCD on older examples. I have an early one with the DE-2 and a late one with the DE-3 HP whose read-out is very much crisper. The LCD and its accompanying ribbon cable and circuit got scarce by 2000. The tiny illuminator for the LCD activated by that even smaller and hard-to-find red button wasn’t exactly a design high point but then it has to be seen as a late 70s design that used what was available. Never shoot mine off an MD-4. It’s ability to do insanely long-and accurate-metered exposures is special.

Think the Fuji design team that developed the X-T1-3 bodies likely contained a few F3 fans. Good design always ages well.

 

[compur]

The FM3a was a pricey flop. Nikon dithered about rolling out “chipped” MF Nikkors in classic focal lengths to accompany it—28/2.8, 45/2.8 and 105/2.5. Only the 45/2.8 Ai-P made it to market. As a sales dud, the FMa indeed showed the popularity of MF cameras among photographers at that time—serious or otherwise.

On what are you basing your opinion that the FM3A was a "flop" and a "sales dud"?

It was in production for 5 years -- longer than the FM, FE, FA, FE2 and many other praised Nikon models and almost as long as the highly touted F100.

 

[cgw]

The FM3a was a pricey flop. Nikon dithered about rolling out “chipped” MF Nikkors in classic focal lengths to accompany it—28/2.8, 45/2.8 and 105/2.5. Only the 45/2.8 Ai-P made it to market. As a sales dud, the FMa indeed showed the popularity of MF cameras among photographers at that time—serious or otherwise.

On what are you basing your opinion that the FM3A was a "flop" and a "sales dud"?

It was in production for 5 years -- longer than the FM, FE, FA, FE2 and many other praised Nikon models and almost as long as the highly touted F100.

Who was willing to shell out that kind of $$$ in 2001 for a manual focus camera? Not many, especially when earlier FM/FE variants in nice shape went for far less. Think you're over-estimating the residual demand in the early '00s for a new MF Nikon. Friends behind photo retail counters found them a very hard sell. Nice camera but late to the party and over-priced. It was really a limited edition item. The black version was pretty but the silver, or "panda," version looked cheap compared to the finish on the FM/FE cameras. Years in production isn't necessarily very telling about sales.

 

[compur]

Who was willing to shell out that kind of $$$ in 2001 for a manual focus camera?

Enough to keep Nikon producing them for 5 years. That's who! Duh.

What evidence do you have that the FM3A was a "sales flop"?