Do You Prefer Rendering Of "Vintage" Nikon Cameras To "Modern" Nikon Cameras?

[John Geerts]

The new Li-Ion kind is apparently very good, but on the expensive side when shipping and taxes are added.

For the Netherlands Amazon (nl or de) had the best deal. Are they active in Norway? 

[Snoogly]

This one has had some good reviews.

https://electropapa.com/en/battery-replacement-for-nikon-en-4-1800mah-72v-li-ion-500268400

[Hugh_3170]

The link does not mention what is the most compatible charger for this replacement Li-ion battery and its more contemporary chemistry.

From my limited understanding of the chemistry of Li-ion and LiMH batteries, their individual chargers are not necessarily compatible with both of these chemistries. 

Am I missing something here?

TIA

This one has had some good reviews.

https://electropapa.com/en/battery-replacement-for-nikon-en-4-1800mah-72v-li-ion-500268400

[Snoogly]

The link does not mention what is the most compatible charger for this replacement Li-ion battery and its more contemporary chemistry.

From my limited understanding of the chemistry of Li-ion and LiMH batteries, their individual chargers are not necessarily compatible with both of these chemistries. 

Am I missing something here?

TIA

I don’t have that battery, but reports on DPR forums say that the stock Nikon chargers work, however unintuitive that is.

[Birna Rørslett]

I have charged the "new" Li-Ion battery pack with Nikon's original car charger, plus the MH-15 which I just received.

Apparently both work well. My old NiMh batteries did a quick resurgence with the car charger, but died pretty fast off in use. Just a few frames. When I used the MH-15 to refresh then recharge them, they had died completely? Perhaps I try the car charger again to see if its more crude and rough charging can ignite new sparks within the packs.

[Snoogly]

The first, and accidental, shot with my 'new' Fujifilm S3 Pro.

Plusses for me are:
Takes AA batteries.
F mount.
Somewhat able to tweak JPEGs in camera.
Not heavy.


Main minus:
The weird interfaces for settings.

[Birna Rørslett]

Before I used a Sony, I thought the Fuji S3 Pro was the weirdest DSLR ever. I had the "special edition" S3 Pro UV/IR and acording to the maker the camera should only be sold to forensic experts!! Only change from the ordinary model was they had replaced the filter over the sensor and put stickers on the box stating "Limited Edition" and "UV is dangerous". Probably an attempt to shift surplus stock before the launch of the S5Pro??

User interface was clumsy and frustrating awkward. The camera devoured batteries at an alarmingly fast rate and 'boasted' 30 sec max. live view, if the camera was in the mood for such frivolities. AA batteries and Norwegian winter was a bad combination.  Raw files were almost impossible to process unless run through the "Hyper Utility" or whatever they designated the worst program I have ever used. Despite being labelled for 'UV'  use, the camera didn't record much more in UV than ordinary cameras , even through my UV-Nikkor lens   I later found out the Fuji didn't record more than a fraction of the EXIF data compared to my Nkons, thus writing a routine to automatically find the lens and extract shooting data to my database was tricky indeed.

[Bob Foster]

The Fuji S2 used the 4 AA batteries plus a pair of CR123 batteries supposedly for powering the flash only. A few functions did behave oddly as the CR123's became drained. Like the S3  the S2 also used F mount lenses.

Color temperature could be controlled manually on the S2 but there was no way to set tint.  If a series of exposures was made under constant lighting conditions, indoors or outdoors, variation in the saturation of blues and yellows was common enough to not be a surprise.

[Birna Rørslett]

I've used the D1X on and off for a while, thanks to the new Li-ion battery packs.

Apart from the lack of GPS connectivity, or rather, the extremely clumsy and akward GPS hook-up, the camera still has a lot to offer. Colours are really realistic and good, when the NEFs are run through NX Studio, Darktable, or Photo Ninja. The NEF format is 4012 x 1324 pix, which by NX studio or other Nikon software is processed into 3008 x 1960 pix. Processing to 10MPix is an option and results are on the soft side. Darktable by default makes 4012 x 2648 pix images and Photo Ninja keeps the 4012 x 1324 layout unchanged. Later they can be resized to match the other alternative dimensions. Photo Ninja is able to extract more fine detail at the expense of a slight increase in noise compared to the others, though.

Combined with the AFS 17-55mm f/2.8 Nikkor the D1X makes for a functional and well handling unit, but is rather heavy as I think I'll resort to smaller lenses for it for future work with this vintage camera. Which, after being stood in my camera exhibition cabinet for 15 years, still works flawlessly.

In terms of sharpness, the D1X in fact has approx. the same horizontal resolution as the Zf (1), viz. ~170px/mm. The vertical resolution is only half that of the Zf, however, at ~85 px/mm. Thus the motif itself dictates what comes out the sharpest. Plus of course the Zf is FX format and covers a wider area than the D1X, from the same vantage point.

[golunvolo]

A few from the D200

[Birna Rørslett]

With such a glorious model available, any camera probably wpuld have turned in excellent results

By the way, the last image shows bad banding in the sky. Major edits on a jpg is rarely a good idea. Neither is walking in coarse gravel and pebbles with heels ....

[Birna Rørslett]

To bring back a point I've made earlier in the discussion of the D1X. KIt has virtually the same horizontal resolution ~170 px/mm as the Zf and its siblings. Vertical resolution is poorer at around 50%.

For many scenes, the difference isn't that great. It all depends. And of courde the D1X is DX format thus covers a narrower angle of view than the bigger FX models (same FX lens from same vantage point).

Which is which of the crops below? Taken with Nikkor 85mm f/1.4 AiS both cameras set to native  base ISO (100: Zf, 125: D1X). The lens at f/5.6 for both.  100% for each crop. The camera was hand held thus crops are not identical, but you get the general idea.

[golunvolo]

With such a glorious model available, any camera probably wpuld have turned in excellent results

By the way, the last image shows bad banding in the sky. Major edits on a jpg is rarely a good idea. Neither is walking in coarse gravel and pebbles with heels ....

  Yes on all accounts. Gorgeous, talented, sweet models. We use to work together and they were game for any pictorial idea. Talk about luxury!
  That day Candy walked all around the desert in those shoes 

   I'm think the banding was a problem with that specific camera body and i had to exchange it for a new new one but I'm not sure. I do know I used two D200s on those early days.

[golunvolo]

To bring back a point I've made earlier in the discussion of the D1X. KIt has virtually the same horizontal resolution ~170 px/mm as the Zf and its siblings. Vertical resolution is poorer at around 50%.

For many scenes, the difference isn't that great. It all depends. And of courde the D1X is DX format thus covers a narrower angle of view than the bigger FX models (same FX lens from same vantage point).

Which is which of the crops below? Taken with Nikkor 85mm f/1.4 AiS both cameras set to native  base ISO (100: Zf, 125: D1X). The lens at f/5.6 for both.  100% for each crop. The camera was hand held thus crops are not identical, but you get the general idea.

I´ll say zf the second one because of the handling of the highlights? but not sure at all.

[Bruno Schroder]

D1x first, because of the jagged lines on the roof rails?