678 VINTAGE CAMERAS
  • Store
  • Services
  • Blog
  • Contact
  • About
  • Policies

Not-so-random thoughts

Tips, tricks, history, etc.

Nikon F4 Profile - Revolution or Evolution?

6/3/2016

14 Comments

 
Picture

    1992. Barcelona. Change is in the air. For three decades, challengers had risen and been vanquished. But now, for the first time, the adversary would gain the advantage. And Nikon F-series cameras would never be the same. For the next 25 years, instead of setting the pace, Nikon would be chasing, always keeping an eye on and trying to keep up with the new market leader. But how did it come to this? And what makes the F4 such a milestone camera in SLR history?

​  Auspicious Beginnings

   1988. Seoul. Anticipation is in the air. The most-hyped 100-meter race in Olympic history is about to start. From the starting line to the first corner of the track, most of the photographers check the settings on their tried and true F3s, prefocus their 300mm f/2.8 Nikkors on chosen spots to record history, and wait. A few Nikon-wielding photogs, though, have in their hands something new. Nikon has chosen these Olympics to demonstrate their latest pro camera, the F4. Many of these individuals do not prefocus. Instead, for the first time in Olympic history, they will let the camera do the focusing.

    Few photographers are cradling Canon's latest (1981) F-1​, the only real challenger to Nikon in the pro market. It's not been much of a fight, though. Canon has sold around 175,000 F-1s since 1981, which sounds like a good number until you compare it with F3 sales; 570,000 in the same time period. A better than 3 to 1 advantage, or more than 75% of the market. In other words, business as usual for Nikon, just as it has been since Canon first tried taking them on with the original (1970) F-1. Today, there is a large battery of Nikons focused on the track. That battery will be smaller, 4 years later, in Barcelona...

   Starting with the 1964 Tokyo Olympics, Nikon sought to use the global reach and prestige of the Games to build their brand. They would specifically demonstrate high-speed versions of the F-cameras in very limited numbers and/or new lenses at these events. When Canon introduced the F-1 in 1970, it was clear that there would be a showdown in 1972. Nikon had a 7 fps (frames per second) version of the F at the Summer Olympics, Canon responded with a 9 fps variant of the F-1 at the Winter Olympics. And from then on, they would both try to one-up the other on the Olympic stage. In 1987, Canon had introduced its brand-new EOS (Electro Optical System) line of auto focus (AF) SLRs. They were heavily promoting it to pros in advance of the Seoul Olympics even though their top model, the EOS 620, wasn't really a pro model and their pro body would not be ready until 1989. So what better time and place for Nikon to pull out the F4 and get the drop on Canon than at the '88 Summer Olympics.  

   The F4 is a smash. It offers speed like never before in a pro SLR. 1/8000 sec. top shutter speed; 1/250 sec. flash sync speed; 5.7 frames per second film advance; and the fastest AF then available. Three metering modes that you can select at the flick (or bump, initially) of a switch. For all those pros who have a bag full of manual focus Nikkor lenses, no problem, the F4 can meter with almost every F-mount Nikkor ever made. It is built like a brick outhouse. And weighs as much as one, too ;-). Its top deck layout is based on the F3 with the MD-4 motor drive attached. The location of the shutter speed dial and shutter release (with concentric drive-mode dial) is nearly identical, so the adjustment from an F3 is fairly painless. The DOF (depth of field) preview and MLU (mirror lock up) button/lever is in the same location  Where the F3's manual film advance lever was, the F4 now has its exposure compensation dial and exposure mode selector. There is now an AF lock button above the familiar AE lock button of the F3, and a new focus mode selector beneath the lens mount release. In other words, an evolution of the F3's control layout, with basically only the AF controls being added and the motor drive now integrated. Nikon sells 230,000 in just three years, quite an accomplishment in a shrinking pro market dealing with major consolidation in print media and the resulting reductions in photography staff. But this will be the F4's apogee...​ 

  Canon's Caped Crusader

​   By the time Barcelona rolls around, a major shift in pro SLRs is already under way. Canon had finally gotten its professional-targeted EOS-1 on the market in 1989. At first, it seemed that it would pose little threat to the F4, particularly from Nikon's standpoint. There was seemingly no major superiority in any specification, and from a build and reliability perspective, the F4 trumped the EOS-1: a shutter rated for 150,000 vs. 50,000 exposures, and a rugged rubber-armored metal body vs. a piddly polycarbonate one. However, Canon had two trump cards of its own.

   Sports photography has long been dominated by the quest for speed. First, it was faster frame rates. Then faster shutter speeds. Faster control response. And once auto focus came along, faster focusing speed became the holy grail. Canon's first attempt at an auto focus SLR, the T80 FD-mount camera, was such a disaster that they decided to start fresh from the ground up. That is what led to the development of the EOS system with its EF (Electro Focus) lens mount. This was opposite to the approach Nikon took, seeking to update its venerable F-mount to AF without losing compatibility with the vast manual focus Nikkor catalog. Canon took a lot of heat for its decision to scrap the FD- mount. And Nikon skilfully exploited this in its marketing. But Canon's decision was the right one in the long run. There would end up being far more performance potential available to develop in the EF mount. And it would be the speed of the EOS-1, both in AF and operation that would swing the struggle for SLR sports supremacy in Canon's favor.
 

     By the time the 1992 Summer Olympics arrive, the handwriting is on the wall. F4 sales have already been slowing. By the end of the Games the coronation of the Canon EOS-1 is complete. The faster and quieter AF permitted by its Ultrasonic Motor-equipped 300/2.8 (then the bread and butter lens of the sports photographer) and button + scrolling dial user interface are just more efficient than the F4, with its traditional physical-control-for-each-function layout. And Canon just piles it on with the updated EOS-1n in 1994. Boosting the AF sensor count from 1 to 5 that are user-selectable, adding an eye-piece shutter and MLU via Custom Function (the F4 already had both), and a beefed-up shutter mechanism, the EOS-1n adds to the strengths and addresses most of the deficiencies of the EOS-1 versus the F4. By the next Olympiad, Canons will outnumber Nikons in the galleries of photographers.

  Paying the Piper 

    Ironically, also in 1994, Nikon introduces the N90s (F90x), its new top "prosumer" body, with a new, faster AF array. But the F4 receives no such upgrade. Nikon has belatedly realized that for speed, the traditional control layout has been surpassed by the button + scrolling dial interface. They have been developing the F5 with a totally new user interface (obviously influenced by the EOS cameras) and a fast 5-point AF system. But they are shutting the stadium doors after the sports shooters have already left. The F5 doesn't debut until 1996. Canon's victory is complete. They now set the pace. Nikon can be innovative (e.g. the F5's matrix and flash metering are out of Canon's league), but they are now reacting instead of being proactive. For example, in 1998, Nikon finally admits the superiority of motor-in-lens focusing and introduces its AF-S lenses with "silent wave" motors. It has only been over a decade since Canon did so. In the fall of 2000, Nikon debuts its first VR (vibration reduction) SLR lens. Sorry, Canon has already had IS (image stabilization) for five years. And the latest twist of irony is that Nikon had introduced VR to the market in 1994, put it in a compact camera, and then did not manage to integrate it into its SLR lenses until Canon already had 8 IS lenses available. And it's not like Nikon didn't know that Canon was working on IS, Canon having showed a prototype 300/2.8 lens featuring stabilization at trade shows in 1988. Nikon's traditional conservatism has finally caught up with them. So where in history will the place of the F4 be?

​   The Legacy of the F4

   The F4 was a milestone camera, not just for Nikon, but for all SLRs. It had more capability crammed into its body than anything before it. It was/is the pinnacle of the traditional control type of SLR. But it clearly marks the end of an era, just as the F5 marks the beginning of a new era for Nikon. The F5 has served as the template for all succeeding pro Nikon bodies. You can put an F5 (1996) and a D5 (2016) beside each other and clearly see the DNA that has come down from the F5. Whereas, you can take the F4, put it beside an F with a motor drive, and clearly see the evolutionary approach that rewarded Nikon with domination of the pro SLR market for over 30 years. And also see the last professional Nikon body of its kind.

    The F4 also serves as a symbol of what can happen when a revolutionary technology arrives and there is hesitation or misjudgment. It's easy to look at Nikon in hindsight and say that they should have been more willing to take risks to advance their AF technology. But the reality is that it was just not in their character. They had built their reputation on rugged, reliable cameras that got the job done, not by being on the cutting edge of innovation. But bear in mind that Canon really did not stand to lose near as much by taking the risks that they did in developing the EOS cameras. Their AF development had been pretty lousy to that point, and they were a very distant second in the pro SLR market. It has often been observed that it is easier to chase than to be chased. The chaser has a clear objective to pursue, in this case the F4 was the ultimate target for Canon to shoot for. Interestingly, in the areas of build and durability (Nikon's traditional strengths), it was not until the third-generation EOS-1v of 2000 that Canon finally met the F4's standard.      

   2016. Stillness is in the air. A burst from the sturdy and intrepid F4 disperses the silence. A smile breaks on my face. It matters not that Canon dislodged Nikon as the leader in professional SLR market share over two decades ago. This is still a formidable camera, and with build quality oozing into my hands. So it may not be as millisecond-responsive as an EOS-1 paired with a USM 300/2.8. I am not exactly in the line of photographing 100-meter races, Olympic or otherwise ;-). 

  References:

       Debut of Nikon F4 @ www.imaging.nikon.com/history/chronicle
       Debut of Nikon F5 @ www.imaging.nikon.com/history/chronicle
       Nikon F4 Background & Personal Summary @ Photography in Malaysia
       Nikkor - The Thousand and One Nights @ www.nikkor.com/story/0035/
       Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L USM @ Canon Camera Museum - Lens Hall
       Canon EOS-1, 1n, 1v @ Canon Camera Museum - Camera Hall
​       1987-1991 @ Canon Camera Museum - History Hall          
 
14 Comments
N.
11/23/2016 05:55:11 pm

Wonderful writing style; I really enjoyed this post.
Thanks!

Reply
C.J. Odenbach
11/23/2016 11:52:36 pm

Thank you for the kind words, N. I'm glad you enjoyed the article. Take care :-)

Reply
Milan
7/15/2017 07:27:17 am

Agree strongly. Nikon is too slo without willingness for greatness. Where are the moviecameras after super 8? Ok, an action camera...expensive and low impressive. Investment in new technology is zero as chasing the Blackmagic marked or picking up Lytros Ilium idea ( thein design is first rate!!!). Facing now Sony on the Mirrorless market or Canon for DSLR is fruitless. That puny Nikon 1 joke doesnt need further comment. I agree, a feeling like the F4 is missing....a digital back for the F lines could give them plus points, but they refuse. This company will cease to exist in 10 years, as did Minolta and Yashica. And not for quality reason.
Love my F4s and keep it, sell my Sony a550 and Nikon D5300.
Samsung mobile takes care for every day pics. Pitty...

Reply
C.J. Odenbach
7/17/2017 09:32:30 am

I'm glad to hear you are enjoying your F4S, Milan. Thanks for your comment.

Reply
Einride
4/24/2019 04:44:20 pm

Great review! I am looking to buy an F4 as soon as possible. It's a beauty. I once owned an F3 ten years ago. Nowadays I have an F5 which is a magical magical camera. Any plans on reviewing the F5? Would love to hear your thoughts on it.

Reply
C.J. Odenbach
4/24/2019 05:24:33 pm

Glad you enjoyed the article, Einride. At the moment I have no plans to do an F5 article, mostly because I don’t have one. But if I did, it probably wouldn’t take much convincing to do so ;-). When I first got into photography the F5 had only been out for a couple of years and was so far out of my budget that I didn’t allow myself to even consider it. Even now, F4s are such a deal and since I use manual focus 99% of the time, there is not the same pull to get an F5 (for me). This is not to slight the F5; it was Nikon’s passport back to competitiveness with Canon in the pro market, and still has more capability than I would ever be able to use. And as I mentioned above, it’s DNA is still very apparent in Nikon’s latest DSLRs. Not to shabby for a nearly 25-year-old camera! Here’s hoping you get decades more enjoyment out of yours :-).

Reply
Maciej
12/13/2019 03:05:16 am

Firstly, I am very happy to see quite a few articles about the F4 written in 2019, 2018, 2017 (which means I will probably leave the same comment to all these articles, sorry;-).... this means a revival. Until a few years ago, all the articles were from the beginnings of the Internet. However, the second hand market supply has shrunk over the last decade, and some cameras became very, very expensive...

Anyway, I used to have quite a lot of various 35 mm and medium format cameras (and evern one 4x5 beast) over the last decade. Currently I am left with just two, but looking into getting back some which I miss. But I have experienced many cameras and I know exactly what I want, what I don't want, what is important to me, and what is less important. I also know my dream set-up, but dreams are out of reach (financially, in this case). Without digressing too much, I am now looking at a 35mm SLR. Autofocus. Why? Because, despite having good eyesight generally, I am really bad at manual focusing on SLRs (RFs are much easier, but that's a different story, again—financially). I never like Canons. I just didn't and don't. I always like Nikons. I had the FA, F3, F4, F5. Talking about AF< we are left with F4 vs F5. I had the F4 first, replaced it with the F5. Loved both. I am not considering any of the other, certainly good Nikon AF SLRs, the F100, F90x, while they have some good asects: price, AF, they lack some key aspects for me: 100% VF (I cannot have anything gatecrashing the edge of the frame!), mirror lock-up (yes, I usually shoot -scapes with 6x7 but on occasion I don't have it with me), and the rock-solid build quality and sealing (I am clumsy, I break soup plates, ink bottles, knock things etc; I know the F100 and F90x are good, but.). I don't mind weight, I am used to carrying a 6x7 and Nikon F5 all day long; I love the weight of the F5, F4, the solidity, the feel. Why is the decision between the F5 and F4 tricky? Well, I love the F4 layout, knobs, and the smaller size and weight with the MB-20. It is also cheaper on the market. I don't like the user interface of the F5, and while it is super comfortable to hold, carry, shoot (especially vertically) it is big, and sometimes hard to squeeze into the bag full of other cameras. I only shoot black and white negatives, so I am not that concerned about the more sophisticated matrix metering, the one on F4 is just fine, particularly, since I also have the spot (never use the CW). Now, for speed, generally. It is important from several aspects. FPS is irrelevant, I never shoot rounds. General responsivness it crucial (with other cameras, especially silly non-SLR digital, I had to wait ages for it to turn on, warm up, and actually shoot), but I don't think there is any difference between the two, both are great. Now, the AF... well, that's the big difference in performance, which is also very important to me. People say that lightning fast AF is key for bobsleigh photographers and "normal" people can sort 99% of situations with the F4's AF. But it's not true. I am no pro, I don't shoot sports. But these milliseconds are equally important when shooting my son executing his knock-out head-on kick during his shinkyokushin fight, or when the happy couple kiss just after saying "YES". I don't mind one AF point. The five on the F5 are no more useful than the on the F4. But the F4's is not even a cross-type... and the speed, and low-light performance, are a real downside... I have used the F4 before and loved it, but I know its downsides.

There is one camera that is supposed to answer all my prayers, which I have never laid my hands on: the Minolta Dynax 9. Old school layout, brick built but small, very fast, very modern. Looks like The One. Yet, there are very few of them on the market, and expensive (around F5 money, or more), and very few lenses... (The D7 is cool lacks the built quality and 155 VF, so is a no-no; the Canon EOS1... no, just no;-).

In the end, it will probably be the F4

Thanks for reading.

Reply
C.J. Odenbach
12/13/2019 11:05:16 am

Thanks for sharing your experience, Maciej. It certainly well-illustrates the wisdom for each of us to evaluate our actual needs and preferences when choosing equipment. And that the points of interface that matter the most to you (viewfinder, the need for AF, the control layout, responsiveness, etc.) should be the deciding factor (budget goes without saying ;-)). Best wishes on your pursuit of an F4.

Reply
Maciej
12/13/2019 01:59:08 pm

The only tiny issue with that evaluation: you have to go through a lot of cameras to find that out, so do it before you have kids to support;-)

Alex
3/29/2025 06:55:11 pm

A great camera and a fantastic accessory system. I was lucky enough to work with it for many years. Its AF speed, MD-4 + MF-23 made it even stronger and more powerful.

Reply
C.J. Odenbach
3/30/2025 08:26:10 pm

Thanks for sharing your experience, Alex. I'm hard pressed to come up with an F model with a more extensive set of accessories than the F4. Almost 40 years later, and it's pitiful how skinny Nikon has gotten on accessories for the Z-system, and they have basically let their flash technology stagnate for well over a decade. Adds even more to the nostalgia for the F4-era for me :-).

Reply
Alex
3/30/2025 04:31:02 am

And I also wanted to ask, do you plan to talk about AF Minolta? They have made a clear revolution in the industry and are worthy of attention, and the optics have many pearls and are worthy of high praise. I currently have a Minolta Dynax 9 as my main camera, but I also often take with me a Minolta 9xi and even a Minolta AF 9000 and get great pleasure from it. The AF speed of the Minolta Dynax 9 is better than the Nikon F4 in my opinion, and a number of decent lenses can be bought at reasonable prices. What do you think about this?

Reply
C.J. Odenbach
3/30/2025 08:56:41 pm

Great question, Alex. I have looked into the early days of Minolta AF a bit, predominantly the 7000, in the trilogy of posts on First Movers. Eventually, I will go more in-depth, as they certainly played a major role in the advent of proper AF SLRs and the whole saga of their crippling by Honeywell's patent litigation is worth a re-telling. It was amazing what Minolta's engineers were able to accomplish with one arm affectively tied behind their back from the early-'90s onward. I can't promise that it will be soon, but we'll get there someday.

I think the Dynax/Maxxum 9 is one of the best SLRs, AF or not, ever built and definitely Minolta's best pro SLR by a mile. The UI, stainless steel body, metering, and other real-world touches made for a still-amazing camera. I spent many a day drooling over the 9 in the pages of Popular Photography in the late-'90s (when it was completely out of my reach, financially ;-)). Unfortunately, Minolta was so weakened by that point, that it was too little, too late. The original 9000 is another favorite. One of the salespersons at my local store in the late-'90s was still using his 9000s regularly, even with their basic, single-point AF system, simply because they worked so well. Best regards.

Reply
Alex
3/31/2025 05:33:17 am

Thank you! I'll wait, I'm interested in your opinion and I like your meticulousness in definitions.


Your comment will be posted after it is approved.


Leave a Reply.

    C.J. Odenbach

    Suffers from a quarter-century and counting film and manual focus SLR addiction. Has recently expanded into 1980's AF point and shoots, and (gack!) '90s SLRs. He even mixes in some digital. Definitely a sick man.

    RSS Feed

    Categories

    All
    Buyer's Guide
    Camera Comparison
    Camera Profiles
    Canon
    Contax/Yashica
    Film
    Filters
    Flash
    Fuji
    History
    Kodak
    Konica
    Leica
    Lenses
    Mamiya
    Minolta
    Nikon
    Olympus
    Pentax
    Point & Shoots
    Rangefinders
    SLRs
    Tips
    Topcon

    Archives

    December 2024
    June 2024
    April 2024
    March 2024
    February 2024
    January 2024
    June 2023
    March 2023
    December 2022
    November 2022
    October 2022
    September 2022
    August 2022
    July 2022
    June 2022
    May 2022
    February 2022
    December 2021
    October 2021
    September 2021
    August 2021
    July 2021
    June 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    July 2020
    April 2020
    October 2019
    August 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    December 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016

​© COPYRIGHT 2016 - 2025. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
  • Store
  • Services
  • Blog
  • Contact
  • About
  • Policies