I have what I hope is a simple question. I have been shooting exclusively B&W photos for less than a year. As a matter of fact, my collective experience with photography is less than a year. I have been shooting with a Minolta X700 using a 50mm and an 80-120mm zoom lens. Unfortunately I the Minolta is beginning to show its age (I purchaes used). Some of my shots are not exposed properly, sometimes not at all. I have tried are sorts of configurations: Automatic mode, program mode, different exposure settings, different film, etc. I cannot find a pattern to the problem. The exposure counter no longer works and the film advance is awkwardly tight. In a nutshell, it is time for a new camera. My question. Can anyone make a recomendation between the Nikon f100 or the N90s? I know the technical specs bewteen the two. I would like comments from someone who has used both systems. Is it worth the additonal expense for the f100? My experience is limited but my interest in photography runs deep. so i need a camera that will not readily outgrow.

Thank you.

-- Gino Difarnecio (gdifarn@evansville.net), September 13, 1999

Answers

Hi Gino

Your problems may be due to factors unrelated to your camera, although it sounds like your X700 is on its last legs. B&W photography requires at the least a basic understanding of the Zone system or some variation. You may already know this system, but I could not tell from your posting and I feel that it needs to be mentioned before launching into discussions about equipment.

Also, you say that some of your shots are not properly exposed. I dare you to find a 35mm photographer who exposes every shot correctly! It's unlikely that you'll be able to achieve this, regardless of your equipment.

Good luck.


-- Asher (schachter@a1.tch.harvard.edu), September 14, 1999.

Hey, Gino, I have some ideas for you to kick around.

I believe it is generally accepted that a person learns to understand using a camera better by shooting with a manual camera rather than an automatic camera.

Both the cameras you mention are quite sophistocated automatic cameras. Have you considered getting a manual camera instead of an automatic? If you want to stay with Nikon, an FM-2 will cost somewhere around half of an N-90. It has an excellent meter, but you set the speed, aperture and focus for distance yourself.

Of course, you can use the N-90 in manual mode, but why pay the money and lug around the extra weight instead of packing an FM-2? You could get the Nikkor AF 50mm lens (f1.8 or f1.4, I'm not sure) which is an excellent, sharp lens that sells for well under $100. Or use the money you save by not buying an automatic and get a manual focus Nikkor 105mm., f2.5 (another excellent lens) in addition to the 50mm. Schmitt Photo on Franklin Street in your city is an excellent, trustworthy source of good used lenses and cameras.

In any event, you can learn photography more readily and more cheaply with a manual camera. At least that is the conventional wisdom, and you might want to consider it before your next camera purchase.

Please bear in mind that I'm not knocking auto cameras. I own an N-90 and it has earned its place in my arsenal. But I worked up to it through manual cameras, having followed the same advise I'm passing along to you. And even though I like having around my N-90 with its excellent strobe flash system, I still do most of my serious work (play?) with manual 35mm and manual medium format cameras.

I also want to comment on the prior answer to your question which refers to the zone system. You should know that there are excellent photographers who believe The System to be of fundamental importance, and there are excellent photographers who believe The System to be an overcomplicated expression of some very simple concepts. Make your own decision on that issue whenever you wish, but it is my opinion that a lack of familiarity with The System should not deter you (especially in this stage of your experience) from pursuing the fun of improving your skills in shooting B&W images.

Best of luck.

--Paul Arnold Dillon, Montana

-- Paul Arnold (osprey@bmt.net), September 25, 1999.

Seeing that not too many people have answered your question Gino- and that I own neither one of those cameras (I want to but then I wouldnt be able to eat for a month- read Im a poor grad student)- I recommend you go over to http://photo.net/photo - there is a ton of information pertinent to your question. Hope this helps

-- malquades red (cosone@hotmail.com), September 27, 1999.

I'm skeptical of the "learn manual first" philosophy. I have an N90s, and it is my first SLR since an old Nikon manual I never used. Why did I never use it? Too heavy, too complicated, etc. - or at least that's what I thought then.

Since getting the N90s just about one year ago, I've shot 50-60 rolls of film, trying just about every type of film I can. I've rented lenses and flashes. I'm a zealous amateur.

The only way a beginner will tolerate failure is by having a few successes. Plunging a beginner into full manual with no aids can be very discouraging. What happens if they get nothing but bad results at first? They are likely to give up. I worked *backwards* from full-auto to full manual. I got decent results with the camera's defaults, and as time went on I started turning off features and trying to control things myself.

This is heretical, I'm sure, but how many of those suggesting "start manual" actually went this route? (No fair if full auto didn't exist when you were learning.) C'mon - there's some hypocrisy here, right? Suffering != Progress.

-- Bob O. (bobo@noname.com), November 18, 1999.

I purchased an N90s and quickly traded it in for an F100 for mostly very subjective reasons. I have no doubt the N90s is a fine camera, but I was more comfortable with the F100's ergonomics and newer technology, particularly the autofocus. It is a joy to use and my only beef is the lack of a mirror lock-up, which is inconvenient but not a showstopper for me.

The suggestion to look on PhotoNet is a good one. Do a search on "F100" and/or N90s (or F90, which I think is the European designation) and you will find tons of information.

-- Chris Werner (cbwerner@att.net), November 19, 1999.

Re Bob O's post: my very first SLR was aperture-priority auto- exposure. It was unreliable, so I replaced it with a manual camera. That was also unreliable, so I replaced that with a Nikon F, which is still going strong. I really wish I had started photography with that Nikon F. I now have an F4 with auto everything, but most of my photos are taken with an F, and they are better photos because of that.

Come to that, I really wish my first camera had been a 5x4.

For some people (like me), I'm sure manual is the best way to start. For others, the less technical sort, I suspect auto is a better start, working 'backwards' as Bob says (I would say forwards, to more control) to manual. I can't tell which camp Gino falls in.

I don't believe it is possible for a photographer to outgrow a particular camera. It is possible, and common, to desire the latest gizmos, gadgets and features that are supposed to make us better photographers. They don't. The most useful tool you will ever posess is usually located six inches behind the viewfinder.

Sorry, I've never used the F100 or N90S, so I can't compare them.

-- Alan Gibson (Alan.Gibson@technologist.com), November 19, 1999.