After losing my 8008 and 6006, a friend of mine was kind enough to lend me his F4 (he never uses it, preferring the N90). Here is what I found after a few days in the woods:
The camera is an ergonomic nightmare
compared to the 8008/6006. Instead of the shutter speed wheel protruding a bit
for easy thumb access, it is a small, hard to grasp dial. Turning the camera on,
a simple slide switch on the 8008/6006, requires holding one little button and
rotating a collar around the shutter release. Instead of shutter speed and
aperture being displayed together at the bottom of the finder, your eye has to
jump between the top of the finder and the bottom to see both. Operation is
clumsy overall.
[Now that I've switched to Canon EOS bodies with their top and back controls wheels, the F4's ergonomics seem even more primitive.]
An F4 and a 50/1.8 is as
heavy as a brick. Combine the F4 body with an 80-200/2.8 lens and you'll be dead
before you've finished one roll of fashion photography, unless you are as big as
Arnold. Plenty of medium format SLR bodies are lighter than the F4. Coming as I
do from a large- and medium-format background, I'd always thought the whole point
of 35mm was take anywhere, lightweight convenience. The F4 is not really in the
35mm spirit as far as I can tell.Conclusion: if you don't have a very specialized requirement, Nikon's lower line cameras, e.g., N90, 8008, are much better user machines.
Text and pictures copyright 1991-1995 Philip Greenspun Notes on the photos: The chili peppers on top were done with an F4, 105 AF micro-Nikkor, Velvia film. The second picture is from Chaco Canyon, New Mexico, 24 AF lens, Velvia. See my New Mexico article for more.