15 years later, reprocessing A2 images with new tools.

André BARELIER wrote:

LeicaEye wrote:

John KM/linhof wrote:

I just bought an A200 that is in like-new condition, along with an A1. Your results inspire me to use this old classics. The A200 is working fine but the A1 needs battery and charger. Are these cameras really 15 years old!

Hi, I had the A2, still have many images from that era (in my library) .. L

The A2 was my first digital camera, in 2004. 18 years ago. What a nice piece of engineering!

Mine was a Konica KD-500, the same year!

RAZORBACKSRULE 1 wrote:

Those look great ! I recently started shooting with an A2 it's a nice camera all I really need. At one time I had pretty much the whole Nikon N1 System the 70-300 VR was superb the rest of the Lenses were not very reliable . The V1 had great colors was actually my favorite. Sold the whole lot to MPB last year kinda miss the V1 .

Actually, ma favourite Nikon 1 camera is the J5. Excellent image quality, and very easy to use, save for the lack of EVF. I loved the A2. Be careful with the tilting EVF. The cable connecting it to the body might broke if you tilt the EVF too often. Enjoy your A2!

ibbz wrote:

I also had an A2 before I bought a KM 7D. Lovely camera and preferred it to the simpler I think A200.

The A200 was not available when I bought the A2. Anyway, I prefer the A2

lovely photos - I’m from London and you’ve been to places I haven’t!!

What? Shame on you!

André BARELIER wrote:

RAZORBACKSRULE 1 wrote:

Those look great ! I recently started shooting with an A2 it's a nice camera all I really need. At one time I had pretty much the whole Nikon N1 System the 70-300 VR was superb the rest of the Lenses were not very reliable . The V1 had great colors was actually my favorite. Sold the whole lot to MPB last year kinda miss the V1 .

Actually, ma favourite Nikon 1 camera is the J5. Excellent image quality, and very easy to use, save for the lack of EVF. I loved the A2. Be careful with the tilting EVF. The cable connecting it to the body might broke if you tilt the EVF too often. Enjoy your A2!

Regards the EVF ribbon cable snapping , there is a preventative measure that can be taken .

IIRC is basically applying some self adhesive tape to a certain point on it and just requires the EVF's cover removing .

There's a thread on this forum detailing this from some years back , you'll find it with a search . Might be worth looking at if you want to protect your camera from it's failure .

RAZORBACKSRULE 1 wrote:

The J5 is one of the bodies I didn't own you stated why no viewfinder. I had a J4 and never used it much it came in a deal with the 70-300 Vr . I loved the system the bodies were great and reliable but most of the Lenses were not . I recently gave 4 lenses to a friend that quit working .

A design fault made all lenses prone to failure, bar the following lenses:

6.7-13 (metal gear aperture mechanism)

10-30 PD (metal gear aperture mechanism)

70-300 CX (metal gear aperture mechanism, alas, occasionally, the long flex cable inside the lens can break, but transporting the lens in non-collapsed form seems to help).

All the others have plastic gears (other than that, everything seems to be identical) and fail, sooner or later. For a long time owners of the original 10-30 could get their lenses repaired for free (the failed gear was replaced, by Nikon, with an identical gear, so that would, in most cases, also fail, eventually). All the other lenses, not mentioned, had the same aperture design but did not get a free repair. Sic.

I have not had any lenses repaired (10-30 excluded, as they got the free upgrade, and were sold soon after), but the 10, 18.5, and the lenses mentioned above, soldier on, flawlessly.

No longer do I have the 32, 10-100 PD, or the lovely 30-110, as they were sold/given away before failure. My wife's mint 30-110 died after having been carefully tucked away and having been unused for a month, or two!

A friend of mine bought the Nikon 1 AW1 for her trip to the Galapagos Island a few years back as it was rated waterproof down to 15 meters . Ideal as they planned on doing a bit of scuba diving in the shallow waters , shallow being only 2-3 meters down , well short of 15 meters .

I had offered to lend her my Sony NEX 3 with it's underwater case or one of my 35mm underwater film cameras , including my Minolta Weathermatic 35DL Underwater Camera , but being a long time Nikon shooter , this kit appealed to her .

First day out with it , paddling at the shore , it took in water and fogged up the lens .

Instructions had been followed , the camera was only 6 inches under water , ruined . So no underwater shots . Once in a lifetime holiday , and no underwater pics to show for it !

Luckily she had her main camera with her , a D4s or D850 , I forget which , so got some great shots ( above water ) .

Back in the U.K , sent the camera off to Nikon for repair under warranty and Nikon refused to do it because it had been exposed to water damage .

W.T.F ? It was sold as an underwater camera who's warranty was invalidated by using it under water ! Crazy .

needless to say she wasn't happy .

So the fact they knowingly made lenses that were faulty by design or due to the components used , and not improve them doesn't surprise me .

neilt3 wrote:

A friend of mine bought the Nikon 1 AW1 for her trip to the Galapagos Island a few years back as it was rated waterproof down to 15 meters . Ideal as they planned on doing a bit of scuba diving in the shallow waters , shallow being only 2-3 meters down , well short of 15 meters .

I had offered to lend her my Sony NEX 3 with it's underwater case or one of my 35mm underwater film cameras , including my Minolta Weathermatic 35DL Underwater Camera , but being a long time Nikon shooter , this kit appealed to her .

First day out with it , paddling at the shore , it took in water and fogged up the lens .

Instructions had been followed , the camera was only 6 inches under water , ruined . So no underwater shots . Once in a lifetime holiday , and no underwater pics to show for it !

Luckily she had her main camera with her , a D4s or D850 , I forget which , so got some great shots ( above water ) .

Back in the U.K , sent the camera off to Nikon for repair under warranty and Nikon refused to do it because it had been exposed to water damage .

W.T.F ? It was sold as an underwater camera who's warranty was invalidated by using it under water ! Crazy .

needless to say she wasn't happy .

So the fact they knowingly made lenses that were faulty by design or due to the components used , and not improve them doesn't surprise me .

There used to be a guy in this group that used his constantly, and being used to underwater photography he knew that you need to follow the instructions, and then some, and disassemble the camera after each shoot, open all lids, take out the battery, and let it dry like that till the next day (not applicable in your friend's case, a truly sad story). If you just miss a minute lid (must be some small ones, like on any camera) or don't grease the seal between the lens and the body things will go wrong!
At one time Meike made underwater housing for the AW1, that you put over the camera, and that was guaranteed for 50 meters.
The only other guy here that was pleased with his AW1 lived in Death Valley, and all his mates' cameras broke down over time due to dust issues, while his AW1 just went on working.

RAZORBACKSRULE 1 wrote:

I shot Nikons since the mid 70s the majority of gear I used very reliable. Not sure what they were thinking with the Lenses in the N1 system . Nikon could have done very well with their 1st mirrorless cameras.

It is weird, as the problems appeared early. Maybe the design guys had no contact with the customer support guys?! The production guys were in China, but where were the rest?! Sounds likely the different divisions had no contact with each other, so the complaints never reached the lens design division?!

Puzzling, and must have cost Nikon billions, the exact sums are to this day totally unknown outside the company.

RAZORBACKSRULE 1 wrote:

As bad as some of the Lenses are I miss the V1 . It was one of my favorite cameras in my 45 years of photography.

Still available on eBay, and elsewhere! A great camera, not least with F Mount lenses, like this I shot earlier today:

Shot through our balcony window, so you see the reflection from my keyboard!

RAZORBACKSRULE 1 wrote:

As bad as some of the Lenses are I miss the V1 . It was one of my favorite cameras in my 45 years of photography.

I never had one, but I thought it was a solid system. The Pentax Q was cute but the sensor seemed too small for a system camera. I guess it didn't matter much in the end. I think technically the Q isn't discontinued, but that's only because Pentax is so slow with releases that nobody can tell the difference.

GossCTP wrote:

RAZORBACKSRULE 1 wrote:

As bad as some of the Lenses are I miss the V1 . It was one of my favorite cameras in my 45 years of photography.

I never had one, but I thought it was a solid system. The Pentax Q was cute but the sensor seemed too small for a system camera. I guess it didn't matter much in the end.

Ah, yes, Pentax is a world of its own. The dynamic range of the Q is so small that some sort of HDR built-in would have been nice! There isn't, of course, Pentax being Pentax.
But I've seen some nice shots taken with the Q, of subjects needing very little DR, like some sleepy owls in their nest. Utmost care must be used to avoid vibration, so a VERY sturdy tripod and ditto head was used, as even minute vibration ruins things if you have a long lens attached (I think he used the Pentax 300

I think technically the Q isn't discontinued, but that's only because Pentax is so slow with releases that nobody can tell the difference.

That sounds very Pentax!

Tord S Eriksson wrote:

neilt3 wrote:

A friend of mine bought the Nikon 1 AW1 for her trip to the Galapagos Island a few years back as it was rated waterproof down to 15 meters . Ideal as they planned on doing a bit of scuba diving in the shallow waters , shallow being only 2-3 meters down , well short of 15 meters .

I had offered to lend her my Sony NEX 3 with it's underwater case or one of my 35mm underwater film cameras , including my Minolta Weathermatic 35DL Underwater Camera , but being a long time Nikon shooter , this kit appealed to her .

First day out with it , paddling at the shore , it took in water and fogged up the lens .

Instructions had been followed , the camera was only 6 inches under water , ruined . So no underwater shots . Once in a lifetime holiday , and no underwater pics to show for it !

Luckily she had her main camera with her , a D4s or D850 , I forget which , so got some great shots ( above water ) .

Back in the U.K , sent the camera off to Nikon for repair under warranty and Nikon refused to do it because it had been exposed to water damage .

W.T.F ? It was sold as an underwater camera who's warranty was invalidated by using it under water ! Crazy .

needless to say she wasn't happy .

So the fact they knowingly made lenses that were faulty by design or due to the components used , and not improve them doesn't surprise me .

There used to be a guy in this group that used his constantly, and being used to underwater photography he knew that you need to follow the instructions, and then some, and disassemble the camera after each shoot, open all lids, take out the battery, and let it dry like that till the next day (not applicable in your friend's case, a truly sad story). If you just miss a minute lid (must be some small ones, like on any camera) or don't grease the seal between the lens and the body things will go wrong!

I'd pointed things like that out to her when she said she'd got one , not just because it was to be used underwater, but due to the chance of condensation forming .

She had tried it out underwater before leaving and on that occasion everything was fine .

Can't see what changed .

At one time Meike made underwater housing for the AW1, that you put over the camera, and that was guaranteed for 50 meters.

It's a Meike housing I have for my NEX 3 , works well .

I've also got one for a Canon G9 that did a good job .

The only other guy here that was pleased with his AW1 lived in Death Valley, and all his mates' cameras broke down over time due to dust issues, while his AW1 just went on working.

-- hide signature --

tordseriksson (at) gmail.....
Owner of a handful of Nikon cameras. And a few lenses.
WSSA #456

I have a Pentax Q10 and a few lenses , the 8.5mm tends to stay on it though . Works out about a 45-50mm effective f/l .

It works well as a pocket camera when even my E mount cameras are too bulky .

The images are quite nice and much better to the ones my mobile phone would take , which is all I would have if I hadn't taken any proper cameras .

So they do serve a purpose.