| A place for us to talk about Nikon related camera gear.
 
		
			Moderator: Moderators
		
	 
		
		
			Forum rulesPlease ensure that you have a meaningful location included in your profile. Please refer to the FAQ for details of what "meaningful" is. Please also check the portal page for more information on this.
 
		
		
			
			
			 by jamesw on Mon May 14, 2007 5:26 pm
 as a result of a bit of a barter/trade with a fella from work (im doing his website for him), i have become the new owner of a nikon f4s! its in pretty good condition for a almost 20 year old camera (in better condition than my d70s...), and looks pretty damn awesome.
 i guess some of you are wondering why on earth ive decided to get a film body (i could have got cash for the website, of course)... well having grown up (as a photographer) on digital, the idea of having to shoot a photo and WAIT for the result is really appealing to me. also, being able to shoot 'proper' black and white really intrigues me...
 i'm pretty damn excited about it, actually! (as you can probably tell...)
 will still use my digi bodies to shoot my paid work (digital has many advantages for shooting action sports... being able to make sure you 'got the trick' being the biggest)...
 but i cant wait to waste a few rolls of film on this baby! 
 and geez... 5.7fps!     anyone else shoot film here on the odd occasion? 
			
				 jamesw
Senior Member Posts: 771Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2007 10:36 pmLocation: norwood, adelaide
				
			 
 
		
		
			
			
 by Reschsmooth on Mon May 14, 2007 5:34 pm
 Shoot film??? Our film/digital body ratio is 4/2!
 I have been keeping an eye out for f4s' or f5's* for a while, but have deferred the purchase pending bonus in a couple of months (they aren't expensive, but I can't justify to Mrs Reschsmooth the need to spend more money on more film bodies). 
 Enjoy the camera - it is supposed to be a beauty.
 Cheers
 P
 * I realise the inappropriate use of the apostrophes, but wanted to indicate that I am after an f4s, not the plural 'f4'.   Regards, Patrick
 Two or three lights, any lens on a light-tight box are sufficient for the realisation of the most convincing image. Man Ray 1935. 
Our mug is smug 
			
				 Reschsmooth
Senior Member Posts: 4164Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 2:16 pmLocation: Just next to S'nives.
				
			 
 
		
		
			
			
 by Kyle on Mon May 14, 2007 5:51 pm
 Shit film at 5.7fps     Deep pockets y0!
 Enjoy your camera mate   
			
				 Kyle
Senior Member Posts: 1148Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 10:28 pmLocation: Penrith, nsw 
 
		
		
			
			
 by jamesw on Mon May 14, 2007 5:53 pm
 Reschsmooth wrote:Shoot film??? Our film/digital body ratio is 4/2!
 I have been keeping an eye out for f4s' or f5's* for a while, but have deferred the purchase pending bonus in a couple of months (they aren't expensive, but I can't justify to Mrs Reschsmooth the need to spend more money on more film bodies).
 
 Enjoy the camera - it is supposed to be a beauty.
 
 Cheers
 
 P
 :
 out of interest, how much do f4's get sold for? i have no intention of selling it, but am curious - just for interest's sake. : * I realise the inappropriate use of the apostrophes, but wanted to indicate that I am after an f4s, not the plural 'f4'.   
 correct grammer is hardly innapropriate! 
			
				 jamesw
Senior Member Posts: 771Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2007 10:36 pmLocation: norwood, adelaide
				
			 
 
		
		
			
			
 by jamesw on Mon May 14, 2007 5:54 pm
 Kyle wrote:Shit film at 5.7fps     Deep pockets y0! Enjoy your camera mate  
 i think that if i am going to shoot sequences i will definitely need to meter it all with my digi, then shoot the sequence in film... 
 because yes, with a 24 exposure roll of film, you only get 4 seconds worth of shot! 
 (and my pockets arent THAT deep!) 
			
				 jamesw
Senior Member Posts: 771Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2007 10:36 pmLocation: norwood, adelaide
				
			 
 
		
		
			
			
 by phillipb on Mon May 14, 2007 6:03 pm
 jamesw wrote: i will definitely need to meter it all with my digi, then shoot the sequence in film... 
 Why would you need to do that, don't you think the metering in the F4 would be up to scratch?__________Phillip
 
 
 **Nikon D7000**
 
			
				 phillipb
Senior Member Posts: 2599Joined: Sat Aug 07, 2004 10:56 amLocation: Milperra (Sydney)       **Nikon D7000** 
 
		
		
			
			
 by Reschsmooth on Mon May 14, 2007 6:07 pm
 jamesw wrote:Reschsmooth wrote:Shoot film??? Our film/digital body ratio is 4/2!
 I have been keeping an eye out for f4s' or f5's* for a while, but have deferred the purchase pending bonus in a couple of months (they aren't expensive, but I can't justify to Mrs Reschsmooth the need to spend more money on more film bodies).
 
 Enjoy the camera - it is supposed to be a beauty.
 
 Cheers
 
 P
 :
 out of interest, how much do f4's get sold for? i have no intention of selling it, but am curious - just for interest's sake. : * I realise the inappropriate use of the apostrophes, but wanted to indicate that I am after an f4s, not the plural 'f4'.   
 correct grammer is hardly innapropriate!
 If you were selling to me, an f4s would go for about $50      , but on the 'open market' (read: ebay), between $300-$500, depending on condition. So, relative to my current position (impending birth of first child), too much, but relative to the quality of the camera, a steal - although not as good as your price     I second the question regarding metering: Nikonian review regarding F4 metering wrote:In the hope that I have not confused you much, let me just say that it works like nothing before. It is not until the advent of the F5, with its RGB matrix metering (a meter that also sees color) that a camera meter could be said to have improved upon that of the F4. 
 PLast edited by Reschsmooth  on Mon May 14, 2007 6:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
					
				Regards, Patrick
 Two or three lights, any lens on a light-tight box are sufficient for the realisation of the most convincing image. Man Ray 1935. 
Our mug is smug 
			
				 Reschsmooth
Senior Member Posts: 4164Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 2:16 pmLocation: Just next to S'nives.
				
			 
 
		
		
			
			
 by gstark on Mon May 14, 2007 6:08 pm
 The F4 meter will eat the D70's for breakfast, I would think.
 Filum ... grab the bulk filum back for the body, and shoot till the cows come home.
 g.Gary Stark
 Nikon, Canon, Bronica .... stuff
 The people who want English to be the official language of the United States are uncomfortable with their leaders being fluent in it - US Pres. Bartlet
 
			
				 gstark
Site Admin Posts: 22926Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2004 11:41 pmLocation: Bondi, NSW 
 
		
		
			
			
 by jamesw on Mon May 14, 2007 6:09 pm
 phillipb wrote:jamesw wrote: i will definitely need to meter it all with my digi, then shoot the sequence in film... 
 Why would you need to do that, don't you think the metering in the F4 would be up to scratch?
 i shoot a lot with pocketwizards and flashes (usually shoot with at least 2 flashes that are off camera),
 so its not so much that the f4's metering is not up to scratch... its just that the exposures get quite complicated and its much easier to get the exposure right by shooting a few test shots first... 
			
				 jamesw
Senior Member Posts: 771Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2007 10:36 pmLocation: norwood, adelaide
				
			 
 
		
		
			
			
 by jamesw on Mon May 14, 2007 6:15 pm
 gstark wrote:The F4 meter will eat the D70's for breakfast, I would think.
 Filum ... grab the bulk filum back for the body, and shoot till the cows come home.
 yeah it probably be a much better meter, i guess im using the word 'meter' in the wrong context,
 the digi will just let me get the exposure right 
			
				 jamesw
Senior Member Posts: 771Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2007 10:36 pmLocation: norwood, adelaide
				
			 
 
		
		
			
			
 by Reschsmooth on Mon May 14, 2007 6:19 pm
 jamesw wrote:gstark wrote:The F4 meter will eat the D70's for breakfast, I would think.
 Filum ... grab the bulk filum back for the body, and shoot till the cows come home.
 yeah it probably be a much better meter, i guess im using the word 'meter' in the wrong context, the digi will just let me get the exposure right
 You may want to look around, but I wouldn't be surprised if there is a polaroid film back for the f4 - I am sure Gary's memory would confirm or otherwise. This can help you with your setup and get your exposures right.
 PRegards, Patrick
 Two or three lights, any lens on a light-tight box are sufficient for the realisation of the most convincing image. Man Ray 1935. 
Our mug is smug 
			
				 Reschsmooth
Senior Member Posts: 4164Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 2:16 pmLocation: Just next to S'nives.
				
			 
 
		
		
			
			
 by Reschsmooth on Mon May 14, 2007 6:20 pm
 cut... Last edited by Reschsmooth  on Mon May 14, 2007 6:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
					
				Regards, Patrick
 Two or three lights, any lens on a light-tight box are sufficient for the realisation of the most convincing image. Man Ray 1935. 
Our mug is smug 
			
				 Reschsmooth
Senior Member Posts: 4164Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 2:16 pmLocation: Just next to S'nives.
				
			 
 
		
		
			
			
 by jamesw on Mon May 14, 2007 6:23 pm
 Reschsmooth wrote:jamesw wrote:gstark wrote:The F4 meter will eat the D70's for breakfast, I would think.
 Filum ... grab the bulk filum back for the body, and shoot till the cows come home.
 yeah it probably be a much better meter, i guess im using the word 'meter' in the wrong context, the digi will just let me get the exposure right
 You may want to look around, but I wouldn't be surprised if there is a polaroid film back for the f4 - I am sure Gary's memory would confirm or otherwise. This can help you with your setup and get your exposures right. P
 do tell gary! 
			
				 jamesw
Senior Member Posts: 771Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2007 10:36 pmLocation: norwood, adelaide
				
			 
 
		
		
			
			
 by phillipb on Mon May 14, 2007 6:26 pm
 Even if there is, it's still cheaper to chimp with digital. __________Phillip
 
 
 **Nikon D7000**
 
			
				 phillipb
Senior Member Posts: 2599Joined: Sat Aug 07, 2004 10:56 amLocation: Milperra (Sydney)       **Nikon D7000** 
 
		
		
			
			
 by Yi-P on Mon May 14, 2007 6:43 pm
 Now you can proudly call yourself a camera owner. Yes, you own a real camera just by now.    I do still shoot film here too, tho one of my film cameras is still in the repair without any news heard from them...   
			
				 Yi-P
Senior Member Posts: 3579Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2005 1:12 amLocation: Sydney -- Ashfield
				
			 
 
		
		
			
			
 by gooseberry on Mon May 14, 2007 6:49 pm
 Congrats on getting the F4 - a wonderful piece of equipment.  What film do you normally use ?  Reminds me to take my old EM out for a spin, haven't used it in a while.  Don't shoot much 35mm film nowadays, the only film I've been shooting using recently is medium format - quite like using Fuji Provia 100F at the moment in this format. 
			
				 gooseberry
Senior Member Posts: 541Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 7:18 pmLocation: Singapore 
 
		
		
			
			
 by methd on Mon May 14, 2007 6:51 pm
 jamesw wrote:Reschsmooth wrote:Shoot film??? Our film/digital body ratio is 4/2!
 I have been keeping an eye out for f4s' or f5's* for a while, but have deferred the purchase pending bonus in a couple of months (they aren't expensive, but I can't justify to Mrs Reschsmooth the need to spend more money on more film bodies).
 
 Enjoy the camera - it is supposed to be a beauty.
 
 Cheers
 
 P
 :
 out of interest, how much do f4's get sold for? i have no intention of selling it, but am curious - just for interest's sake. : * I realise the inappropriate use of the apostrophes, but wanted to indicate that I am after an f4s, not the plural 'f4'.   
 correct grammer is hardly innapropriate!
 I've seen them go mostly for around $300 body only in good condition. There was one a few weeks back that was NEW literally new and never used and that went for $1200 to someone u'd assume is a collector. 
			
				 methd
Member Posts: 483Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2007 9:12 pmLocation: Melbourne, VIC. 
 
		
		
			
			
 by DavidR on Tue May 15, 2007 2:54 am
 hey jimmy if your going to shoot B&W with this bad boy get ilford, preferably the iso125 stuff. its fantastic! welcome to real photography   
			
				 DavidR
Member Posts: 110Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2007 4:07 pmLocation: Unley Adelaide 
 
		
		
			
			
 by gstark on Tue May 15, 2007 8:02 am
 DavidR wrote:hey jimmy if your going to shoot B&W with this bad boy get ilford, preferably the iso125 stuff. its fantastic! welcome to real photography  
 Ilford is good, but if you can find some Agfapan .... yummy.  g.Gary Stark
 Nikon, Canon, Bronica .... stuff
 The people who want English to be the official language of the United States are uncomfortable with their leaders being fluent in it - US Pres. Bartlet
 
			
				 gstark
Site Admin Posts: 22926Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2004 11:41 pmLocation: Bondi, NSW 
 
		
		
			
			
 by gstark on Tue May 15, 2007 8:39 am
 Reschsmooth wrote:You may want to look around, but I wouldn't be surprised if there is a polaroid film back for the f4 - I am sure Gary's memory would confirm or otherwise. This can help you with your setup and get your exposures right.
 Possibly, but a digital body would be quicker and cheaper. The problem with a D70 is that it doesn't shoot B&W natively, and it's minimum ISO is 200; if you're shooting film, you may want to drop back to 64 or even 25. Not even Polaroid goes down to that ISO of course, and while roll film is getting harder to find, I'd imagine that Polaroid is becoming even thinner on the ground.g.Gary Stark
 Nikon, Canon, Bronica .... stuff
 The people who want English to be the official language of the United States are uncomfortable with their leaders being fluent in it - US Pres. Bartlet
 
			
				 gstark
Site Admin Posts: 22926Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2004 11:41 pmLocation: Bondi, NSW 
 
		
		
			
			
 by jamesw on Tue May 15, 2007 10:51 am
 DavidR wrote:hey jimmy if your going to shoot B&W with this bad boy get ilford, preferably the iso125 stuff. its fantastic! welcome to real photography  
 yeah brah, thats what mikey said! gonna pick some up this arvo i think. 
			
				 jamesw
Senior Member Posts: 771Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2007 10:36 pmLocation: norwood, adelaide
				
			 
 
 Return to Nikon |