Nikon F and the vietnam war

Paul Howell · Feb 5, 2025

When I was working for the wires I had a bag that I used to carry my gear when in transit, flight, long bus ride, my last bag was a Puma gym bag that I had a luggage repair shop filt with a studeir bottom and but a metal cable in the strap so it could not be cut. I used sweat shrits to keep the items from being jostled around. My thinking was I did want a bag that said please steal my Nikon. Most of the time I left the bag at the hotel, (if in a safe location and could be checked at the desk or at the field office, when shooting. There were time that I had to keep with me. By the 80s the "Photo Vest" became popular, as I worked in hot environments I never used one.

ic-racer · Feb 5, 2025

I also recently got a nostalgic Nikon F. I started photography in 1973 and always have know of the F and F2 but never, until now, owned one.

Paul Howell · Feb 5, 2025

I had a F, F2 and F3P, my F3P was stolen from checked luggage at LAX after 911. A friend who I knew when we both Air Force photographers passed away and left his black and chrome Fs and a couple of lens.

2ndGenNikonian · Friday at 12:46 PM

I remember reading about how some photojournalists used 35mm lenses and some used 28mm. I'm looking to eventually replace my 35mm, and I'd like to know which focal lengths were favored and why.

250swb · Saturday at 3:13 AM

2ndGenNikonian said:
I remember reading about how some photojournalists used 35mm lenses and some used 28mm. I'm looking to eventually replace my 35mm, and I'd like to know which focal lengths were favored and why.

I guess if you are being shot at a 28mm would be more useful just to get something recorded, or if you are able to compose the image a 35mm would be best. If not being shot at a 35mm can become just like a 28mm by taking two steps back, but always follow the wise words of Robert Capa who said 'if your photographs aren't good enough it's because you aren't close enough'.

RalphLambrecht · Saturday at 7:05 AM

Shootar401 said:
Over the weekend I watched a documentary on the Vietnam war and in a few scenes I saw some footage of a photographer carrying 2, maybe 3 Nikon F's. I couldn't make out the lenses because it was only for a brief second. I'm assuming one was a 50 f/2 or f/1.4 The other one was a but longer, maybe a 135mm or 200mm. But regardless what do you think the lens compliment would be for a photojournalist in Vietnam following the troops on patrol?

I would guess a 35, a fast 50 and maybe a modest tele (105) . I any event, Vietnam War photographers were way ahead of the game when compared to Civil War photographers!

Paul Howell · Saturday at 1:13 PM

Eddie Adams wrote that AP issued him 2 Nikon Fs, 2 Leica M3s, lens from 28 to 200, but he only carried one or two bodies with a wide and normal. Air Force Military Photographers had access to both F and Ms, same range of lens, Those assigned to a base also had access to MF and LF. Not sure about he the Army and Navy. As the war spaned a decade, the early Euopean photopghers had Leicaflex and Contaflex an old UPI shooter told me that in 65 he was sent for a year, at the time UPI was using the F but he took his own Pentaxs, 2 Pentax Spotmatic and 4 lens, 28 35m 50 and 105.

Arthurwg · Saturday at 4:48 PM

250swb said:
There is a great book that I hesitate to recommend because I just looked up the price on Amazon, but if you can find a cheap copy it is 'Requiem-By The Photographers Who Died in Vietnam and Indochina', lots of pictures of camera's as a side bar to the serious intent of the book. If not that you can make do with Dennis Hopper as the photojournalist in the film Apocalypse Now', plenty of Nikon's on show.

Great book I agree.

Arthurwg · Saturday at 4:57 PM

Trask said:
If you're interested in Larry Burrows and photojournalism during the Vietnam War, "Lost Over Laos" is an interesting book -- the title comes from where the helicopter carrying Burrows and others went down.

Thanks for that. I now have it on order.

RalphLambrecht · Saturday at 7:49 PM

Alan Klein said:
My Nikon F Photomic T bought in 1965 in Japan was lost by me on a NYC Subway a few years later.. Along with the 50mm F1.4 and 135mm. I still have the downgraded Nikormat FTN with 50mm f/2.0 I bought in the USA to replace it. I think I have a Vivitar 70-210 zoom too. The 50 and 135 was a great pair though.

Your subway loss must have been a great hardship!

chuckroast · Sunday at 1:44 PM

2ndGenNikonian said:
I remember reading about how some photojournalists used 35mm lenses and some used 28mm. I'm looking to eventually replace my 35mm, and I'd like to know which focal lengths were favored and why.

I bought my first Nikon - a black Photomic FtN Apollo - at the very tail end of the VN war (I was not involved in the war myself). Over the years I've owned many Nikon bodies and lenses. I still have a black Apollo FtN currently in for overhaul, though not the original one I owned.

I mention this say that I've never found the 28mm to be a compelling lens, though I know it was really popular. To me, the best "normal" lens is the 35mm f/1.4 AIS, the best wide is the 20mm f2.8 AIS, and the best tele is either the 85mm f/1.4 AIS (if you don't mind the weight) or the 105mm f/2.5 (a classic). In that lineup, a 28mm never made sense to me.

That said, the 28mm is the one lens I don't own that I'm still tempted to get and play around with because I have so little experience with it.

Paul Howell · Sunday at 2:42 PM

The 28 has it uses, when working PJ to capture a crowd scene, building facades, cathedral interiors, I use mine off and on, the Nikon AI I have is good lens, sharp, not much distortion wide or stopped down to F16. When I converted my lens from non AI to AI it was the lens that traded in for the AI version, I thought the nonAI was bit too soft at 2.8. In those days prior to computers assisted manufacturing it was possible for a dud to slip though the QC process.

rhmimac · Sunday at 3:32 PM

Questions raised in the back of my mind when reading this thread:
1. Would there be any comparable amount of new digital Nikons in today's warzones?
2. Would they hold on as strong in the same harsh conditions?
3. No camera in that aera ever had dust- and moisture seals like digital machines of today, how did they survive so well the dust and damp moisture? Film has to be more restistant in a Nikon F than a highly sensitive device called "sensor", imho.

Old_Dick · Sunday at 3:52 PM

Arthurwg said:
Great book I agree.

Bullet holes are amazing. $75, not bad.

Paul Howell · Sunday at 5:06 PM

rhmimac said:
Questions raised in the back of my mind when reading this thread:
1. Would there be any comparable amount of new digital Nikons in today's warzones?
2. Would they hold on as strong in the same harsh conditions?
3. No camera in that aera ever had dust- and moisture seals like digital machines of today, how did they survive so well the dust and damp moisture? Film has to be more restistant in a Nikon F than a highly sensitive device called "sensor", imho.

Nikon lost a fair share of the pro level market in the late 80s to 90s when Canon released the EOS V1, the F4 auto focus was just as good. Today AP, Reuters, NY Times all use Sony A1. Mirror-less bodies have a less to go wrong, no mirror. I dont know of any that have a bullet, but my Sony A77II is strong, the A99II which I don't have is very rugged. In the day when in the field I had a plastic bag I would put my camera in, I would also tape the camera up as well I could. Some used rain capes that allowed for one hand to operate the shutter button. The Air Force did not issue but some civilian PJs would use a Nikonos with the 35mm and 80mm lens. When working for the wire I had a Nikonos 1 that I used on occasion.

Arthurwg · Sunday at 5:53 PM

Old_Dick said:
Bullet holes are amazing. $75, not bad.

Dare I say it? War makes for some of the best photographs.

chuckroast · Sunday at 6:51 PM

Arthurwg said:
Dare I say it? War makes for some of the best photographs.

Human drama generally makes great photos.

GregY · Sunday at 6:55 PM

chuckroast said:
Human drama generally makes great photos.

....substantially more succinct than the previous post....

laser · Sunday at 9:31 PM

Nikkor 50mm was probably a f1.4. It provides a brighter screen so it is easier to focus and the extra speed is nice to have.

cowanw · Sunday at 10:01 PM

It is probably a faux pas to say this, but the other side had photographers as well. I found one reference that the North Vietnamese government gave out Practica's from East Germany mounted with a 50mm lens.

rhmimac · 2025-04-07T01:36:29-0400

Paul Howell said:
Nikon lost a fair share of the pro level market in the late 80s to 90s when Canon released the EOS V1, the F4 auto focus was just as good. Today AP, Reuters, NY Times all use Sony A1. Mirror-less bodies have a less to go wrong, no mirror. I dont know of any that have a bullet, but my Sony A77II is strong, the A99II which I don't have is very rugged. In the day when in the field I had a plastic bag I would put my camera in, I would also tape the camera up as well I could. Some used rain capes that allowed for one hand to operate the shutter button. The Air Force did not issue but some civilian PJs would use a Nikonos with the 35mm and 80mm lens. When working for the wire I had a Nikonos 1 that I used on occasion.

Great to read how a pro taped up his camera's to withstand harsh environnement and abuse. I would trust a IBIS mirrorless body as less as a flapping mirror in a DSLR. I was told the sensor is suspended and will shift to compensate shaking and movement. It will be tested for sure but my Olympus mirrorless did stop quite a few times and needed a reset after banging on my back while cycling. I disn'tbusd Nikon mirrorless or Sony mirrorless so far but Sony A1 must be one of the best in market in that way. I understand pros will get only the best to counter mishaps as they did with the Nikon F.

Arthurwg · 2025-04-07T11:37:39-0400

GregY said:
....substantially more succinct than the previous post....

There's drama and then there's drama. Is that succinct enough?

GregY · 2025-04-07T11:38:43-0400

Arthurwg said:
There's drama and then there's drama. Is that succinct enough?

There's enough horror in war.....

Paul Howell · 2025-04-07T12:26:40-0400

cowanw said:
It is probably a faux pas to say this, but the other side had photographers as well. I found one reference that the North Vietnamese government gave out Practica's from East Germany mounted with a 50mm lens.

The North Vietnamese used a variety of cameras, Russian, Chinese, East German, and when they captured American or South Vietnamese gear they used that as well. 20 or so years ago when in Paris I met by chance a retired North Vietnamese photographer, he and his son were touring France and Italy. His son spoke English. He told me that he used a Kiev rangefinder until he got a Nikon F with a set of lens when his unit overran a South Vietnamese base in 1972. He used the Nikon until he retired in the 80s. He had a Chinese version of an Minolta, had a few lenses as well.

Nikon F and the vietnam war

Advertiser

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency