Nikon F65 (N65)
Posted 25 November 2007 - 17:08
Please help me finance Fotozones by disabling your ad blocker for this site.
You can also support Fotozones by buying your gear from our affiliate advertisers using these links:
Posted 25 November 2007 - 23:11
I bought mine about a year ago because I'd purchased a Sigma 12~24 auto-focus zoom, in a "G'-type Nikon mount which wouldn't work on any of my older bodies, so after doing a bit of research, I bought a Nikon re-furbished demo from Cameta Camera in New Jersey for $79.00 US, which even included a free AA battery adapter.
The N65 has a metal lensmount, depth of field preview, movable auto-focus spots, mid-roll rewind, the usual S,A,P, and metered manual exposure modes, self-timer and a number of other features (that I'll likely never use).
It's no F5, but it has everything I need, at a ridiculously low price. So far it has worked flawlessly and given me excellent exposures every time I've used it, so I give it five stars and highly recommend it.
Posted 22 January 2008 - 23:11
I can't see any other reason to buy this camera.
Posted 23 January 2008 - 00:28
I checked your profile, and of the seven photo genres you listed there, this camera would handle at least four of them (where the subjects are static) very nicely.
What this camera lacks beside the rugged build quality of more expensive models and is the "sex-appeal" and "wow" factor that so many posers and gear freaks need to make an impression as they walk around with all their high-end gear trying to impress non-photographers.
For my Sigma 12~24, it fits the bill very nicely and gives me, a photographer of thirty years experience all the features I need to take very nice (as I've been told by others) photos, at a ridiculously low price.
If it doesn't suit your needs so be it, but don't dismiss it out of hand as less than a good camera, because you'd be making a mistake.
Posted 23 January 2008 - 00:46
Why? Because any number of these film SLRs command very little money, as any check on KEH.com will show. So if someone were to consider an N65 in 2008 -- someone who wants to get a Nikon film SLR and currently doesn't own one -- they could get any number of better cameras for virtually the same money, which is to say, not very much. Like an N80. Or an N75, etc. This is especially the case since an N65 cannot be purchased new anymore.
I should add that I never read your post when I wrote mine, and I guess it appears I was being intentionally conflictual or contrarian when in fact I wasn't. I do own an N65 and I have put hundreds of rolls through it. It does a good job at making pictures. It's just not a good choice in 2008.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users
An appeal to all Fotozones visitors: please help me to keep this site going by starting your gear purchases using any one of the affiliate links shown below:
Amazon.com | Amazon.co.uk | Amazon.de | Adorama.com | thinkTank Photo | DigitalRev.com | OWC | B&H or Donate via PayPal