ehwang's Full Review: Nikon F100 Body Only 35mm Film Camera
Well, what can say about the F100 that hasn't already been said in numerous other opinions? Having owned Nikon equipment since 1978, I guess my perspective is that of a professional who has upgraded his Nikon equipment over the years and seen the improvements made with each model.
Starting with the original F body with Photomic prism, then F2, FE2, FM2, F3, F4S, and now finally the F100, I've owned, used and abused all these cameras. I still own two FE2s and an FM2 for backup. I skipped the F5 because, to tell you the truth, I'm a little hesitant to buy a camera body that costs more than my car is worth when the F100 does everything I need.
The F100 was an impulse purchase for me. Unlike other $1300 purchases I have made in the past, I did very little if any real research before I bought this camera. It was purchased solely on my past experience with the Nikon brand. I traded in my F4S and an extensive medium-format outfit toward the F100 and the latest 80-200mm f/2.8 AF-S. I'll explain my reasons for buying this camera later, but it's one of few impulse items I have not regretted buying.
I am very pleased with the autofocus, focus tracking and auto exposure when compared with my old F4. It is quicker and more accurate with slow zoom lenses than my F4 ever was with the fastest prime lenses, especially in low light or no light situations. However, when I saw how flawlessly the autofocusing performs on the Canon EOS-3, I was a little disappointed but not surprised. Nikon has never been a big innovator, but they do take existing technology and make the most rugged, dependable and generally well designed cameras around.
The main reason for Nikon's technology lag is probably the reason I have stayed with Nikon all these years. My oldest Nikon lens--an AI'd 55mm Micro that I purchased with my F body in 1978--still works with today's F100 and will probably work with future Nikon bodies for quite some time. While other camera manufacturers have changed their lens mounts to suit the needed functions and be first to market, Nikon has had to work harder to maintain their backwards compatibility while cramming more and more functions into an older lens mount design.
As cameras get more and more sophisticated and with the advent of good quality digital photography, I find myself less and less interested in the equipment and more concerned with the images I am producing. While all this automation is great for shooting fast and "from the hip", it hasn't resulted in my taking any better pictures than I did 20 years ago. The camera body is basically just a light-tight box with an exposure mechanism. As a matter of fact, my FM2 still takes the best pictures. Perhaps this is because I have to slow down and think about the settings on the camera and this in turn makes me think more about the my picture composition.
All I know is that if I take my F100 up into the mountains and take a picture of a wildflower blooming in the middle of a snow field with all the camera settings on automatic, the picture will be underexposed. You'd think with all the fancy 3D matrix metering, that a camera this sophisticated would know it was taking a picture of snow and to compensate for it. Nope, sorry, but cameras can't "think" yet. All cameras, from a $4000 Hasselblad to a $100 point and shoot will still try to expose to 18% gray. It's up to the photographer to use his or her judgement to correct the camera's settings and use the exposure compensation to get the shot.
So where am I going with all of this? Just this: unless you are shooting racecars at LeMans, or the quarterback from the 50-yard line, you probably won't benefit from the fast autofocus, focus tracking or the 4.5 fps film advance--some of the biggest marketing hype you'll read about this camera. And, unless you're a complete novice with more money than photography knowledge, you probably don't want to allow the camera to make all the decisions for you. It's nice to know that it can do everything automatically when that once-in-a-lifetime shot unexpectedly presents itself, but why spend that much money for such rare moments.
So why DID I buy this camera? Truthfully, it weighed much less than my F4S and it focuses in low light and total darkness when combined with a Nikon Speedlight. These may sound like trivial reasons, but actually these were my two worst complaints about my F4S. After three years, they eventually became reasons to not even use the camera anymore. In the end, I wanted an autofocus camera I would use.
Should YOU buy this camera? Unless you're upgrading from an older Nikon body and have specific deficiencies that this camera addresses, you're probably better off getting a used F4, N90 or 8008s, a new N80, or an N60 and spending the money you saved where it counts...on the lenses. If you're just starting out and don't have a large investment in Nikon glass, you may even want to check out Canon. But who knows when they'll change their lens mount again and make all your lenses obsolete. On second thought, stick with Nikon.
An evolution of the N90s with many of the F5s traits, the F100 is a lightweight professional alternative to the big F5. The list of features is not li...More at Buy.com
The F100 a 35mm SLR body geared to the professional and is situated beyond the N90 and behind the F5 as the #2 top camera in the Nikon line With its s...More at Amazon Marketplace
Epinions.com periodically updates pricing and product information from third-party sources, so some information may be slightly out-of-date. You should confirm all information before relying on it.
- Add to My Yahoo!: 
- Add to Google Homepage: 
© 1999-2008 Shopping.com, Inc.