No MLU With Nikon, WHY?
Question:
Thanks for the correction! By the time I’d gotten my F2, the 21/4 was long gone from my hands; I then had the 20/3.5 AI-S as replacement. It’s good to hear that it was still usable with the F2. I was under the impression that one of the early series fish-eyes were also obsoleted for later models, but I could be wrong. Godfrey – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Just for your info, the Nikkor f=2.1cm/4 lens will indeed mount and function 100% on the Nikon F2. It’s all pro-bodies AFTER the F2 that will be damaged when mounting this lens. It’s rare that Nikon drops the ability to use any of their older lenses on any of their pro-bodies, but this is one example inwhich they did just that. I could be wrong, but I believe this is the only SLR lens Nikon has ever made that is not usable on the Nikon F5 (F4/F3 too). Please note that I use the term "SLR lens" loosely.
Response:
Hello Godfrey, Just for your info, the Nikkor f=2.1cm/4 lens will indeed mount and function 100% on the Nikon F2. It’s all pro-bodies AFTER the F2 that will be damaged when mounting this lens. It’s rare that Nikon drops the ability to use any of their older lenses on any of their pro-bodies, but this is one example inwhich they did just that. I could be wrong, but I believe this is the only SLR lens Nikon has ever made that is not usable on the Nikon F5 (F4/F3 too). Please note that I use the term "SLR lens" loosely. Cheers – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – There were a couple of lenses from the Nikon F era that required MLU. Not all of them are compatible with the F2 or later bodies … the one I’m thinking of is the Nikkor 21mm f/4, which had a special little flat in the rear element mount which locked into a piece in the F’s mirror box. That piece was gone in the F2. No, I think Nikon supports MLU on the top line bodies for the rare and specialized applications where it is required. Godfrey The F5 may have MLU to maintain compatability with all F-mount lenses – a rare few of the oldies require the mirror to be locked up before they could be used.
Response:
– Nikon’s mirror/aperture/shutter regulator mechanism is unlike Canon’s EOS in that it is a set of mechanical linkages (perhaps a design legacy from supporting the Nikon F lens mount). Therefore, it’s not just a software change, the feature requires design changes to be incorporated.
This view clearly has no basis in fact. All cameras bodies made by Nikon before the EM (circa 1980) had MLU of some sort – true MLU with F, F2, Nikkormats (including EL) and mirror pre-fire (FM, FE). Therefore the absence of MLU has nothing to do with the F mount itself. Andrew – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text — The series of Nikon bodies which included mechanical self-timers had aperture/mirror pre-fire as they were able to be tripped mechanically. The feature disappeared when most bodies went to electronic self timers as they used the primary electrical shutter release tripping sequence instead. (I’m not sure whether the new FM3a has mechanical selftimer and pre-fire or an electronic self timer.)
Response:
Several Fisheye-Nikkors required the mirrors to be locked up during mounting and use. 8mm f/8 7.5mm f/5.6 10mm OP f/5.6 6mm f/5.6 Since I have several of those, I like the mirror lockup capability on my F5s. dan Lindsay Santa barbara
Response:
The F5 may have MLU to maintain compatability with all F-mount lenses – a rare few of the oldies require the mirror to be locked up before they could be used.
Yes, wasn’t there an extreme fisheye back in the 1970s that had this feature? — David Littlewood
Response:
There were a couple of lenses from the Nikon F era that required MLU. Not all of them are compatible with the F2 or later bodies … the one I’m thinking of is the Nikkor 21mm f/4, which had a special little flat in the rear element mount which locked into a piece in the F’s mirror box. That piece was gone in the F2. No, I think Nikon supports MLU on the top line bodies for the rare and specialized applications where it is required. Godfrey – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – The F5 may have MLU to maintain compatability with all F-mount lenses – a rare few of the oldies require the mirror to be locked up before they could be used.
Response:
For such applications where you just HAVE to have MLU, use one of the best bodies around that costs virtually nothing today,–an old Nikkormat.
Exactly! Under the best of circumstances, MLU is a bit slow to use. You must pre-meter, pre-focus, and either set the camera on a tripod or use an auxiliary viewfinder on the accessory shoe. Under these conditions, a Nikkormat is about as fast and automated as anything out there. I guess they figure there’s very little overlap between the set of photographers who want flashy new computerized plastic AF bodies and the set of photographers who would be willing to go to the trouble of actually using MLU. –Rich
Response:
They added the MLU to the F5 otherwise it would not have been accepted as a "Professional" camera. Thats the only reason its there.
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – The F5 may have MLU to maintain compatability with all F-mount lenses – a rare few of the oldies require the mirror to be locked up before they could be used. It could be that the dampening of the mirror action is exceptionally good on some bodies. I’m not sure this is the case. The F5 has the best balanced mirror around but they still felt the need to add MLU. I read a lot of support for MLU in this NG but I wonder how many of its proponents have tried to shoot without it. I’ve noticed mirror shake when shooting consumer tele zooms where the body is mounted on the tripod head. Here’s an article about MLU, there’s another good study somewhere using an F3 that showed it amde a big difference but I don’t have the link with me. http://www.photo.net/photo/nature/mlu.html
Response:
With today’s high speed, thin blade shutters MLU requires having a ’shutter blind’ in the camera. The added cost of this item apparently would push the price level of certain cameras beyond where Nikon wants them. And you’re right that few people use the feature, so it’s not something that is required by the masses. Why do you believe this to be necessary? The shutter blades may be very thin, but they are AFAIK perfectly light tight. My EOS 1n works fine with MLU. Is there something odd about Nikon shutters? You’ll find your camera manual telling you not to change lenses in direct sunlight. What do you think that’s for?
I guess Nikon should answer that one. I don’t have a Nikon and have never owned one, so I can’t even look. My EOS 1n instructions do not contain such a recommendation (I have just checked), and neither (do far as I can recall) do those of any other cameras I have owned. I have changed lenses thousands, nay tens of thousands, of times in daylight, without taking any precautions against sunlight, and I have not seen any evidence of sun fogging the film. I therefore suspect someone at Nikon has got it wrong, is being ultra- cautious, or is copying some long-forgotten warning relating to cameras of an earlier age. I do not believe that light will pass through metal of any usable thickness, period. Has anyone ever seen any problems from this cause? — David Littlewood
Response:
The F5 may have MLU to maintain compatability with all F-mount lenses – a rare few of the oldies require the mirror to be locked up before they could be used.
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – It could be that the dampening of the mirror action is exceptionally good on some bodies. I’m not sure this is the case. The F5 has the best balanced mirror around but they still felt the need to add MLU. I read a lot of support for MLU in this NG but I wonder how many of its proponents have tried to shoot without it. I’ve noticed mirror shake when shooting consumer tele zooms where the body is mounted on the tripod head. Here’s an article about MLU, there’s another good study somewhere using an F3 that showed it amde a big difference but I don’t have the link with me. http://www.photo.net/photo/nature/mlu.html
Response:
This thread has come and gone so many times in the past 5 years… Here’s the synopsis from the last couple of times I’ve seen it: – Nikon does not see much demand or need for the MLU feature in general use. They provide it on their professional, top line body and always have, because they expect those bodies to be used in technical applications where MLU is a required capability. – Nikon’s mirror/aperture/shutter regulator mechanism is unlike Canon’s EOS in that it is a set of mechanical linkages (perhaps a design legacy from supporting the Nikon F lens mount). Therefore, it’s not just a software change, the feature requires design changes to be incorporated. – The series of Nikon bodies which included mechanical self-timers had aperture/mirror pre-fire as they were able to be tripped mechanically. The feature disappeared when most bodies went to electronic self timers as they used the primary electrical shutter release tripping sequence instead. (I’m not sure whether the new FM3a has mechanical selftimer and pre-fire or an electronic self timer.) My own testing of Nikon FM, FE2 and F2 bodies with various very long lenses and mounting/support systems demonstrated conclusively to me that MLU was unnecessary for any work I was liable to be doing as long as the camera/lens support system was properly configured. Your mileage may vary, but in the course of 33 years of photography with Nikons the only times I have used MLU were when I needed to for reasons of lens configuration (the old Nikkor 21/4 used with the F required mirror lock up), photomicroscopy and astrophotography. I could bet that I’ve used the feature for less than 200 exposures, out of all the thousands of photos I’ve made over the years. Godfrey – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – <<Why is it that Nikon does not offer a Mirror Lock-Up feature with its bodies except on their manual cameras and on the F5? Do the auto-focus bodies below the F5 offer MLU/Aperture Pre-Fire with the self-timer activation instead of standard MLU? I’ve got to bet that they are convinced that, with the exception of their high-end pro users, hardly anyone else uses it. They may well be right, but a simple mirror-prefire mode linked to the self-timer like many other camera models have would add next to nothing to the production cost of the camera, and very little to the development cost, IMHO. It is really just a firmware addition, assuming their shutter mechanism allows the mirror and shutter to be controlled independently, and would all but eliminate this complaint.
Response:
<<Why is it that Nikon does not offer a Mirror Lock-Up feature with its bodies except on their manual cameras and on the F5? Do the auto-focus bodies below the F5 offer MLU/Aperture Pre-Fire with the self-timer activation instead of standard MLU? I’ve got to bet that they are convinced that, with the exception of their high-end pro users, hardly anyone else uses it.
They may well be right, but a simple mirror-prefire mode linked to the self-timer like many other camera models have would add next to nothing to the production cost of the camera, and very little to the development cost, IMHO. It is really just a firmware addition, assuming their shutter mechanism allows the mirror and shutter to be controlled independently, and would all but eliminate this complaint.
Response:
With today’s high speed, thin blade shutters MLU requires having a ’shutter blind’ in the camera. The added cost of this item apparently would push the price level of certain cameras beyond where Nikon wants them. And you’re right that few people use the feature, so it’s not something that is required by the masses. Why do you believe this to be necessary? The shutter blades may be very thin, but they are AFAIK perfectly light tight. My EOS 1n works fine with MLU. Is there something odd about Nikon shutters?
You’ll find your camera manual telling you not to change lenses in direct sunlight. What do you think that’s for?
Response:
The inclusion of a MLU capability requires significant redesign of the mirror box area from what I’ve been told. It’s obviously a requirement for those who shoot a lot in the shutter speed ranges of say, 1/15s through 1 second. Either side of that the vibration element of the exposure period would be insignificant. Just how many amateurs shoot within that range? Real amateurs? This forum is frequented mostly by above the ordinary amateurs, in my observations, and their requirements are not those of the ‘average amateur.’ For such applications where you just HAVE to have MLU, use one of the best bodies around that costs virtually nothing today,–an old Nikkormat. Dan Lindsay Santa Barbara
Response:
It could be that the dampening of the mirror action is exceptionally good on some bodies.
I’m not sure this is the case. The F5 has the best balanced mirror around but they still felt the need to add MLU. I read a lot of support for MLU in this NG but I wonder how many of its proponents have tried to shoot without it.
I’ve noticed mirror shake when shooting consumer tele zooms where the body is mounted on the tripod head. Here’s an article about MLU, there’s another good study somewhere using an F3 that showed it amde a big difference but I don’t have the link with me. http://www.photo.net/photo/nature/mlu.html
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – <<Why is it that Nikon does not offer a Mirror Lock-Up feature with its bodies except on their manual cameras and on the F5? Do the auto-focus bodies below the F5 offer MLU/Aperture Pre-Fire with the self-timer activation instead of standard MLU? I’ve got to bet that they are convinced that, with the exception of their high-end pro users, hardly anyone else uses it. With today’s high speed, thin blade shutters MLU requires having a ’shutter blind’ in the camera. The added cost of this item apparently would push the price level of certain cameras beyond where Nikon wants them. And you’re right that few people use the feature, so it’s not something that is required by the masses.
Why do you believe this to be necessary? The shutter blades may be very thin, but they are AFAIK perfectly light tight. My EOS 1n works fine with MLU. Is there something odd about Nikon shutters? — David Littlewood
Response:
Very good question! I personally use this feature whenever possible. I love Nikon’s and wish they would address this concern on all of their bodies. When shooting scenics or still lifes, it is an invaluable technique for optimum sharpness.
Response:
It could be that the dampening of the mirror action is exceptionally good on some bodies. I’ve taken many 1:1 macro shots at slow shutter speeds (1 -1/30) as well as lots of tripod / bean bag shots with 400mm+ at 1/30 – 1/60 with extremely sharp shake-free results (and I’m very critical when editing this stuff). This is with an F100. I read a lot of support for MLU in this NG but I wonder how many of its proponents have tried to shoot without it. If you have a modern high-end body it could be worth experimenting to see if MLU really makes any difference. I’m really perplexed with those that insist on using it for subjects like landscapes with wide lenses – it’s almost like an obsessive disorder.
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Why is it that Nikon does not offer a Mirror Lock-Up feature with its bodies except on their manual cameras and on the F5? Do the auto-focus bodies below the F5 offer MLU/Aperture Pre-Fire with the self-timer activation instead of standard MLU? jim mueller
Response:
Why is it that Nikon does not offer a Mirror Lock-Up feature with its bodies except on their manual cameras and on the F5? Do the auto-focus bodies below the F5 offer MLU/Aperture Pre-Fire with the self-timer activation instead of standard MLU? jim mueller
Response:
<<Why is it that Nikon does not offer a Mirror Lock-Up feature with its bodies except on their manual cameras and on the F5? Do the auto-focus bodies below the F5 offer MLU/Aperture Pre-Fire with the self-timer activation instead of standard MLU? I’ve got to bet that they are convinced that, with the exception of their high-end pro users, hardly anyone else uses it.
Response:
With today’s high speed, thin blade shutters MLU requires having a ’shutter blind’ in the camera. The added cost of this item apparently would push the price level of certain cameras beyond where Nikon wants them. And you’re right that few people use the feature, so it’s not something that is required by the masses. -=[ Karl ]=- karl at kpphotography dot com – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -<<Why is it that Nikon does not offer a Mirror Lock-Up feature with its bodies except on their manual cameras and on the F5? Do the auto-focus bodies below the F5 offer MLU/Aperture Pre-Fire with the self-timer activation instead of standard MLU? I’ve got to bet that they are convinced that, with the exception of their high-end pro users, hardly anyone else uses it.
