Nikon F90?

RobAdair

RobAdair

Well-known member
Just got a Nikon F90 to replace my knackered Canon T90. No expert on autofocus SLR\'s but this seems pretty good, I\'ll know better when I\'ve had a few rolls of film through it though.

Anyway, just wondering if I\'ve done OK or if it\'s a stone age beast? Got the body and 2 Nikon zoom lenses for £200, the lad I bought it off reckons it was £800 - £1000 when new and it\'s in mint condition, still boxed and unmarked (he\'s moved onto digital and was reluctant to let it go) Anything I should know about this model?? Cheers :D
 
:D
Hi Rob I think you\'ve done OK there, nothing too much to worry about if it\'s in as good condition as you say. They were first introduced around 1990-1992 so it\'s certainly not stone age.
I\'m fairly sure this was Nikons 3rd or even 4th generation of AF cameras so you can be sure any earlier AF quirks will have been ironed out.
I\'ve found a link for you to download the manual if you don\'t have one. The manual itself is for the N90 but this is just the US version of the same camera.
Here you go:

http://www.lensinc.net/manuals/F90_N90AF_user.PDF

Hope this is some help to you.
 
Not a bad choice at all Rob - and just because it\'s \"film\" and not digital doesn\'t mean it\'s \"stone age\".
I still use 35mm film cameras (Nikon F3HPs and FMs). The only thing digital has over film cameras is the speed at which you can see your results. Quality-wise, they are no better (at most, the quality is \"as good\" as film - but no better and to achieve the \"as good\" stage, you\'re talking megabucks as well as megapixels).

The F90 was introduced in 1992 and has one (if not THE) best metering systems (3D Matrix).

The fact that most peeps seem to be \"going digital\" means that you can obtain 35mm Nikkor lenses for a lot less now, than you could a few years ago. Mind you, Nikkor lenses do tend to hold their value, so don\'t expect to pick them up for next to nothing........quality is still quality, even if technology does advance - you\'ll not find any better lenses than the Nikkors.

Happy snappin\'

BTW.........DON\'T buy any film, Rob.........I\'ve got LOADS of the stuff.......I\'ll bring a few rolls round for you tomorrow - if ya not in, I\'ll just stick them through the letterbox.



[Edited on 30/3/2006 by TC]

[Edited on 30/3/2006 by TC]
 
Cheers lads ;)

TheWestwind - thanks for the link mate but the camera was boxed and complete with the manual, guarantee and receipt from 1994 (body and a 50mm lens £599 :o )

Thanks for the offer of the film Tony, that\'s very kind (or should I say usual) of you. I think you might have slightly misread my post though.

I have always used 35mm (well, since 1985 anyways) but I have always used manual focus Canon bodies (T90 and T70) This is my 1st foray into autofocus SLR\'s (technophobe or what :o ) and the dinosaur comment was aimed at the fact that I didn\'t know if the autofocus technology had changed much since the early 1990\'s and I had bought a lame donkey.

However, after reading a few website reviews I think I did OK, the autofocus is almost instant and even responds in low light, the lenses are pin sharp and the features are right up there (especially the metering) I just need a good dedicated flash now and I\'ll be up and running (SB-26 looks the bizz with similar features to the Canon 300T that I used and loved for 20 years)

Busy digging the rest of my gear out the loft as we speak...then the bairns had better look out ;)
 
Lol, sorry Rob.......I seen the words \"stone -age\" and camera mentioned and automatically assumed you were referring to the camera using film.

Reason I jumped to that assumption is that I\'m often accused of being a \"dinosaur\" or being in the \"stone-age\" for still using film.......lol

Dunno if you still want the film, but I\'ll drop it off anyway.......like I said.....I\'ve got LOADS of the stuff.
 
Thanks Tony, it will be most appreciated :D

BTW I don\'t mind been called a dinosaur by the average point and shoot auto program digital compact user who wouldn\'t understand his depth of field from his aperture :o

Apart from work, I\'ve never been out all week as 2 of the 3 bairns have been poorly sick (2nd time in 3 weeks :( ) and me and our lass have had to juggle half days holidays and flexi time to make sure one of us was here with them.

First bit of time to myself today and I\'m busy catching up on the things I should have done earlier in the week (as well as going in early to catch up my hours :()
 
Sorry to hear about the bairns, Rob :(

I stuck the film through the letterbox earlier thismorning.........well, I think it was YOUR letterbox, otherwise ya neighbour\'s gonna be wondering how they managed to win 5 rolls of film.......lol
 
Thanks for the film Tony, I knew you would be a \"Fuji\" man, blows Kodak film away IMHO, unless you use Kodachrome 64 of course ;)
 
Fuji every time, as far as colour negs go, Rob

Kodachrome 64 (or even better, 25, if conditions allow) is the dogs dooh-dahs for trannies (ermm.....that\'s \"slide film\" for those who may be wondering...lol).

Ilford PanF (50ASA), FP4 (125ASA), HP5 (400ASA) for b/w prints - if you can get it...........difficult (if not imposible) to get in high street shops these days.
 
Not too keen on XP2 Rob.
It\'s OK-ish if you want a grainy effect - especially as you can rate it at anything from 400asa upwards.
I bought a few rolls of it when it 1st came out - only used 2 rolls and still got the rest (lol...several years beyond its\' use by date now !)

Thanks for the link re. Ilford film.

I don\'t have any probs getting hold of Ilford film, though - I get it through the trade ;)
 
Hi Rob
first things first, hope the bairns are alright, that is the most important.
when i use my canon eos5000 35mm for an all round performance i use fuji sepia 400 iso. Anothet thing, i found myself using manual focus more and more rather than automatic. Mainly because as you say the focus is quick, it will focus on something in the foreground, tree branch etc, rather than the subjcet, okay if you have plenty of time to change but when shooting the likes of wildlife you could loose a good shot, It is very handy though when you are takking shots of kids in the garden or beach and you need that quick focus to catch that once in moment shot, the ones you cant set up or recreate
 
Totally agree, Alan.

Both auto focus and manual focus have their place and respective \"merits\" - it\'s knowing when to adopt each that\'s the key. Mind you - all of my 35mm cameras are manual focus (I said I was a dinosaur...lol). There\'s a lot to be said for zonal focussing and using the aperture / depth of scale precisely.
 
Thanks for the input Alan :D

I think autofocus is only as good as the person behind the lens. As long as you lock the focus before re-composing the actual picture you should be fine (that\'s where the point and shoot mentality lets people down) Must admit though, I\'ve yet to have that problem with the Nikon ;)

Regarding the sepia film, I bought loads of the stuff when I was working in Japan (Konica though) and I was dissappointed at the prints (all colour corrected back to b/w by the helpful, knowing lab :mad: )

As far as wildlife photography goes, I \'ve only got an 28-70mm and a 70-210mm zoom at the moment (Nikon AF fit) so it\'ll be the parent\'s horses and the dogs and cats until I save up for the big gun :(

Incidentally, what are peoples favourite lenses? My old setup (Canon FD) the 24mm, 50mm (F1.4), 100mm and 300mm saw the most use (landscape, portrait and wildlife) Biggest waste of money was the 500mm mirror lens. Do you prefer fixed or zoom?
 
Forgot to add about the XP2..........the reason it\'s cheaper to get processed is that it\'s done as if it were colour neg film - not b&w - consequently there is a very distinctive blue cast to the prints.

Re favorite lenses - Nikkor 28mm f2.8 gets most use in my gear.....but that\'s partly because of the nature of the pix I have to take for work.

The lenses I most like to use myself are the f1.2 50mm Nikkor for it\'s sharpness and low light uses: the Nikkor 28mm f2.8: and the Nikkor 28mm PC lens - great for buildings and wider landscapes - this is a specialist lens and boy am I glad I didn\'t have to pay for it!

Another lens I\'ve got and use frequently is a 300mm 2.8 Nikkor (this one cost several thousand pounds - again - I\'m glad I didn\'t have to fork out for it) I\'ts pin sharp and is great for use in lower lighting situations - weights a ton though and DEFINITELY needs to be mounted on a monopod - the front element is the size of a saucer :o

Mirror lenses - worst thing to be invented as far as picture quality goes.
Sharpness is \"questionable\" at best, speed is ridiculous for the focal length (most mirrors are around f8 ot f11 at max) and those annoying \"doughnut\" hi-lites are ......well....annoying. Introduced around the mid 80\'s for those who wanted a cheap alternative to a standard tele lens.

Zoom or fixed focus?............for me..... always fixed focus. Seems to me you sacfifice quality, speed and sharpness for convenience when opting to use a zoom - this applies to the more expensive brands as well as the cheaper ones.

Never - ever use a tele converter (even the top quality ones) - they\'re crap and aswell as slowing your prime lens down considerably, don\'t \'alf degrade the picture quality as far as sharpness goes. Although it\'s more expensive, initially - buy a bigger tele lense if you need to - you\'ll be glad you did in the long run.

Rob, a good place to get quality used and new Nikon gear is Grays of Westminster. They deal \"exclusively\" in Nikon / Nikkor equipment and have been on the go for donkeys years. I\'ve had a few dealings with the owner (Gray Levett) and bought a fair bit of gear from them. Would love to have the opportunity to actually go down there (they\'re based in London) and have a look around their Nippon Kogaku Room - they\'ve got every Nikon camera that was made as well as a host of other goodies and rarities in there.
You can visit their website at:

http://www.graysofwestminster.co.uk/index.php


[Edited on 2/4/2006 by TC]
 
never had any probs with the sepia film, although it was fuji and developed at fuji in whitley bay, might make a difference. Regarding the wildlife photography no sweat with the lenses you already have, i got a 75-300mm when i first went to South Africa, the ranger got us so close i had to drop down to a 38-76mm, ten foot away from a pride of lions and belive it or not the flash did not bother themn a bit. And these where treul;y wild lions, not on a game reserve. And thirty metres away from a rhino. How there was no camera shake i dont know. As for the focus lock, sometimes if an animal or bird was moving you could lock on and still be out of focus when you took the snap. As TC says it is a case of knowing when to use which.
As for all the technical nitty gritty, TC is our man and not a dinosaur, i will prodably find that i will use manual focus more and more.
 

Similar threads

D
Have a look at these may be of some help
Replies
1
Views
274
craigyboy
C
C
Viz\'z Top Tips
Replies
2
Views
680
Hiram.A.Biff
Hiram.A.Biff
Back
Top