Where to get a Nikonos V serviced?

[Rockhound76]

I just talked to Southern Nikonos and they're doing my rig. I still like the Nik V, although I will ONE DAY go digital.

Bob used to service my cameras and always did a great job. My son is looking at moving to UW photo (he's 14) and I still think for the $$ the Nikonos is a great learning system. For a few $$, he'll have a pro quality setup.

A little digital rig with a decent flash is still fairly expensive.

 

[cdiver2]

I just talked to Southern Nikonos and they're doing my rig. I still like the Nik V, although I will ONE DAY go digital.

Bob used to service my cameras and always did a great job. My son is looking at moving to UW photo (he's 14) and I still think for the $$ the Nikonos is a great learning system. For a few $$, he'll have a pro quality setup.

A little digital rig with a decent flash is still fairly expensive

.

And no comparison in quality, take a look WCI FAQ - Megapixel Print Size Chart for Digital Cameras

 

[f3nikon]

What good is quality when the Nikonos lacks the precision focusing, composition and exposure feedback!

The Nikonos is like a digital PS without the auto focus (manual focus) and without the LCD display! The shooter is actually “guessing” on the focusing distance, unless a framer is used, then you are limited to subjects that will fit in the framer, and not many subjects will stick around with a framer poking at them.

Still you have to bracket or guess at the exposure and how much bracketing can you do with a 36-frame roll of film?

I would meet you half away on this and say that the Nikonos could be very useful for wide-angle seascapes use only, like when paired with the Nikonos 15mm wide angle lens, the best optics still to this day.

The setup of choice for the pro U/W photographers in the past, is a SLR for precision focusing in macro and the Nikonos 15mm for wide-angles.

 

[Thalassamania]

Fred Dion at Underwater Phototech

 

[Thalassamania]

The setup of choice for the pro U/W photographers in the past, is a SLR for precision focusing in macro and the Nikonos 15mm for wide-angles.

My favorite is my Schulke adaptor, a housing for a 13mm Nikon lens that permits its use, underwater, on a Nikonos.

 

[Rockhound76]

In more than 20 years of diving with the Nikonos rig, I can honestly say I'd never heard anyone say that "every exposure had to be bracketed" and "focusing is a guess". The exposure system with this camera is very precise. Focusing is an estimate, but within the depth of field available at most common f-stops, even with the 35mm lens, out of focus shots are pretty much a non-issue. I do agree, for close-ups and macro, the framers are a pain, especially for skittish subjects, but with laser guides and cut down framers, I can still shoot in focus and do it more quickly than most anyone using a PS digital in macro. I have to agree, though, an SLR or DSLR is better suited for this task.

With the 20mm or 15mm lens, if you are out of focus, you have a problem bigger than being stuck with a PS (POS) film camera.

I've shot thousands of photos with my rig. I've can recall no problems with focusing or exposure in any condition and with any lens (excluding the ext. tubes and close up, which require those annoying framers.) When I take a poor photo, it is always MY fault. The TTL system is pretty darn accurate, once you understand its limitations. I bracket for asthetics, but the latitude with all but the most high-end transparencies makes this something I do only for a few critical "set" shots. I've had many more problems with exposure controls on my prosumer digital cameras.

I'll also admit that it would be nice to have a thousand shots on the dive, but I happen to enjoy the diving too. If I kept my eye glued to the finder the entire dive, I might loose some of that enjoyment.

I don't believe in hanging on to obsolete technologies (I dive with a computer, too). However, I do have problem with over-dependance on technology or subscribing to the 'latest' gizmo when the standard is still superior to what is most commonly available.

I own 7 digital cameras. They take great photos in certain circumstances. I ride a bicycle across the country every summer and my "kit" camera is an Optio W30. Fro what it does, it's the best camera I've ever owned. As an UW camera? It's just "okay". The aperture is too small, the focusing is erratic and requires patience and the lag, while short, is very annoying.

For the $200 it cost me to refurbish my Nikonos, I'm happy to avoid shutter lag, a "hunting focus" and reduced resolution. For $200, I would be happy for my kid to learn about depth of field, exposure, manual focus (an estimate of apparent distance, not a guess). When he's ready and wants to move on, I'll suggest a nice little digital rig for casual shooting. But, until he can swing $10K for a quality DSLR and housing, or until there is nowhere left to process his film, I'll suggest he stick with the Nikonos, if only for the quality.

 

[Mycroft]

"What good is quality when the Nikonos lacks the precision focusing, composition and exposure feedback! "

Don't push your experiences onto the equipment when the fault is yours, not the equipment.

I shoot film. According to one of the previous posts, the film I shoot is an equivalent of 31-39MP. I also have not shutter lag. I also learned how to set up depth of field as a young lad, when that was all we had. I have grown rather good at it.

My current above water cameras still have no auto anything, but the glass on them is still unmatched by anything you can find in the digitial world. And at the end of the day, I take the images I want and slap them into my coolscan V. Gives me the best of both worlds.

 

[DesertEagle]

I shot the Nikonos for two reasons. First were the 15mm and 20mm lenses. They are both very forgiving with focus. And the corners show no distortion. I never used the 35mm lens, except as a body cap.

The second reason was getting Ilfochrome prints. In the hands of a good printer, the best prints were direct from my slides. I have yet to see a scans that are better than direct prints. If you want to do a slide real justice, have a drum scan done. Drum scanners work differently than flatbeds or Coolscans. My own scanner can do 24 megapixel scans, but the quality is nowhere near as good as an Ilfochrome or drum scan. This is my experience. Others may have different results.

Oh, and I used Underwater PhotoTech. They are within an hour of Boston. It's like going to a candy store.

 

[f3nikon]

"What good is quality when the Nikonos lacks the precision focusing, composition and exposure feedback! "

Don't push your experiences onto the equipment when the fault is yours, not the equipment.

I shoot film. According to one of the previous posts, the film I shoot is an equivalent of 31-39MP. I also have not shutter lag. I also learned how to set up depth of field as a young lad, when that was all we had. I have grown rather good at it.

My current above water cameras still have no auto anything, but the glass on them is still unmatched by anything you can find in the digitial world. And at the end of the day, I take the images I want and slap them into my coolscan V. Gives me the best of both worlds.

If the Nikonos 3,4,5 were so great in focusing why did Nikon come out with the Nikonos RS SLR camera?

Maybe because (also answers Roundrock’s post) to get that “acceptable” not “exact” focusing the depth of field has to be maxed out, to get this maxed out condition requires small apertures like F22.

To properly expose this almost pinhole aperture opening the strobe have to be at full blast plus the help of the local power plant!

And the background…well you can forget about it! Most of you pictures will look like they were shot at midnight!

Note: the Nikonos 3 does not have TTL.

 

[DesertEagle]

Depth of field on the Nikonos 15mm lens is huge. I've never had problems with out-of-focus images.

As for the RS, it made macro photography significantly easier. The huge viewfinder made it less of a challenge to ensure proper composition and focus. I don't think Nikon intended the RS to be a direct replacement for the Nikonos V. That's why the initial lenses were 20-35mm, 28mm and 50mm. Later on, the 13mm fisheye was released. By the way, that's a gorgeous lens. That still left Nikon without a 15mm lens for the RS. Only later on did Renee Aumann come out with the 18mm lens. It was made in limited production and was extremely expensive.

Here is a photo of the 18mm. I found this on the Internet. I'm not sure who to credit it to.