Some insight on the Nikon FM3A and FM10

For over twenty years I have owned a film based SLR. A few months

back my camera of twenty plus years made its final picture. I

replaced it with a D70. While I enjoy learning digital, I still find

myself wanting a film camera. I was looking on the Nikon website and

the FM3A caught my eyes as did the FM10. If you have used either of

these cameras extensively, can I trouble you for your thoughts on how

well these camera function. I shoot mainly Kodachrome and Fujichrome

films.

 

Thank you.

My suggestion is to get a f100 or atleast a f80 then you can share

lenses among them and the d70. You can always manual

focus with AF cams. On the other hand, you can't meter manual

lens with the d70 and the newer g lenses won't work with

manual nikons. Yes, I know this doesn't answer your original

question.

I've had an FM3A for about 2 years now and I very much enjoy it. Good build quality (albeit I've heard the old F2 was built better - I can't say that the few times I've held an F2 that it made my FM3A seem poorly built though), bright viewfinder, good handling (I added an FM grip as I have fairly large hands and I find it fits me better with the grip). MLU on self-timer only - but's that's better than the F100! (which I also have and like). I like manual lenses and manual focusing, and the FM3A is definately better for that than is the F100, although I don't hesitate to use manual lenses on the F100. My biggest complaint is that it won't mount non-AI lenses (actually, it *will* mount my only 2 non-AI lenses, but it's a pretty tight fit and it makes me nervous so I don't normally do that). Aperture priority for those occasions I want it, but normally I run it on manual. The match-needle is great - until it gets too dark and then the needle becomes invisible. I don't have any experience with the FM10, but I believe it is a mostly plastic (I think including the mount) camera made by Cosina, and I've heard that the viewfinder is not nearly as bright as the FM3A. Still, it's cheap and the slower max shutter probably shouldn't normally be a big problem. I've heard that if you're thinking about an FM10 you should consider buying an FM2(n) instead (used, obviously). Sometimes I think I should pick up an FM, since it will mount non-AI lenses. Maybe if I find one cheap ...

 

The FM3A has flash exp compensation and DX coding, neither of which the FM10 has, and IIIRC, it also has a higher sync speed (1/250 - I'm pretty sure the FM10 has a slower sync).

 

In short, I almost always take my FM3A in preference to my F100. If I liked AF more than MF, then I would probably take the F100 in preference.

 

If you shoot mainly primes then there a a bunch of great MF lenses available for not too much money. There are also a few really good MF zooms (50-135 f/3.5, 70-210 f/4, 75-150 f/3.5) which are also pretty cheap.

the fm3a is a great camera as long as you don't need af

<p><a href="http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/nikonfmseries/fm3a/htmls/index.htm">This website</a> provides a pretty good introduction to the FM3a. </p>

 

<p>Keep in mind that if you want your lenses to be fully interchangeable, be advised that the D70 will not meter with the classic AI/AIS lenses. However, you'll be able to use an FM3a with almost all Nikon autofocus lenses (except for G-type lenses).</p>

I bought an FM3a to accompany my D100 after my N80 died. It's an excellent camera,

although I should note than an FE2 is almost the same and cheaper. I've found it to be a

real workhorse, whereas my F100 has been in the shop twice in the year I've owned it

(although in total honesty I should note that I

bought the F100 used, and the prior owner put so much film through it the pressure plate

is etched; kind of like <a href="http://www.cameraquest.com/

LeicaM4G.htm">this camera</a> but not nearly so bad). One possible source of trouble

is that your D70 will only meter with autofocus lenses, and your FM3a won't deal with G-

type lenses; but there's a lot of lenses that satisfy both of them.

<p>

I don't know the FM10 at all.

Marty - The FM3A is the latest in the FE/FM line, which are ledgendary. It remains to be seen weather Nikon continue the line, or weather the FM3A will be the last. Either way, it will pay you to buy one while they are still availible new. It is designed for semi-professional use and is a totally different beast to the FM10, which is a cheaply made, strictly amateur camera, that you don't want.

 

If you are not concerned with owning a ledgend, go for one of the mid-range auto-focus models, and have total lens compatibility with your D70.

 

I used the FE2 for 11 years and exposed 780 rolls of film without a single hitch.

The FM3a is a last of its kind, very well designed and built camera. The FM10 is a camera that was designed to sell at a very low price point and is made by Cosina for Nikon. Do not overlook the fact that the FM10 can only be used in all manual metering mode, while the FM3a can also be used in an autoexposure mode. Personally, I would buy a 25 year old, original FM, before a FM10.

I have to agree, the FM3a is a great little camera, very robust and has most of the features needed. It doesn't have auto-focus (obviously) nor does it have any programmed exposure modes but who needs those?

 

It does have TTL flash and DX coding which do prove useful. With an MD12 motor, it handles pretty well, but it becomes very noisy. People do sometimes look for cover when you start pressing the trigger!!

 

I neither have ever used an FM-10, I don't think it has ever been officially sold in the UK where I am based, but I do know it is a cheaply built consumer model designed and built by Cosina. It is probably wise to leave it alone.

 

One option you may consider (I have just bought one) is a used F4. If you are after build quality it has it in spades although it is quite heavy. Used F4's are dropping in price quite significantly, I paid half for my mint used F4 than I did for my new FM3a.

 

F4 gives almost silent operation, matrix metering, auto-focus (a bit slow) more sophisticated TTL flash than FM3a and compatibility with almost every Nikkor from AI onwards. A nice feature is an electronic rangefinder to confirm you have correct focus with a manual lens. Manual lenses can be used in Aperture priority and manual, same as FM3a.

 

I really like my F4 although I've not had it for long so haven't used it as much as my FM3a. I suspect that your only problem with an F4 may be that it shows up the build of your D70!

 

I also have an FE and FM2n all of which are strong and easy to use and have never given me any problems even though the FE must be well over 20 years old.

 

You won't be disappointed with any of these cameras. although I suspect you would be with the FM-10.

 

Joe

As Leslie points out, the number of lenses that are completely compatible with the D70 and an MF Nikon SLR, including the FM3A, is more limited. E.g, for all practical purposes you cannot use G lenses on any MF body while no-CPU MF AI/AI-S type lenses cannot meter on your D70. If you get an F100 or N80, the problem with G lenses goes away. But an F100 would be a very different camera from an FM3A.

 

If you like the old-fashioned MF cameras, the FM3A would be a good choice. But it lacks modern features such as spot and matrix metering which can be important to you, especially since you shoot slide film that require more precise exposure.

 

Finally, in case you get any DX lenses for your D70, they won't be fully compatible with any film-based SLR.

 

Only you can decide for yourself, but I would keep all of those compatibility issues in mind.

Marty:

 

I followed and similar path - started with film,

went digital, then back to film.

 

I looked at the FM3a. Probs with it are (1)can't see the meter needle in low light or when background is dark (2)low eye relief viewfinder (only 14mm) so it's difficult for eyeglass wearers to use. So I got an FM10.

 

I have a Nikon 8008, a Sony digital 717, a Leica p&s. For posting thing on my web site and other things indoors I use the 717. For shooting the grand kids running around the house I use the Leica. For anything outdoors I use the FM10. As far as the 8008 goes, I brush the dust off it every now and then.

 

The criticisms you read about the FM10 are nonsense. In my humble opinion (BS Tufts, MS Yale, PhD Tufts, all in Mechanical Engineering, graduate work a MIT, 10 years of professional practice in a variety of industries from nuclear submarines to aerospace) the polymer body of the FM10 is superior to metal, aluminum, brass or titanium because (1)it has better impact absorbing capability (2)it doesn't rust (3)it damps vibrations (4)it keeps the cost down (5)it's lighter. Also, the velvety exterior of the FM10 is easy to hold onto, especially if your hands are wet, which mine often are since I use the FM10 a lot in my boat.

 

Let's not forget, the wings of the stealth fighter are ABS polymer as are countless ocean crossing yachts. Virtually all high performance components made for ocean racing (masts, spars, cleats...) which are subject to incredible abuse, are made of polymer, not metal. My guess is you will see more and more photo gear being made of polymer in the future. Why should polymer be praised for use in tripods but not cameras?

 

My guess is the people who trash the FM10 are knee deep in over hyped and over priced Leica gear or they're wondering why they paid $1600 for an F3 which doesn't do anything the FM10 won't do.

 

I checked the meter on my FM10 against my 8008 and it's dead on. I took off the 35-70 zoom it comes with, which I admit is not the best lens out there, and put a 50/f1.8 manual focus on mine. I'll put the pics I get from it up against those from any other 35mm camera.

 

I love that little camera. It's such a relief to feel you're in direct contact with what you're shooting rather than having an overly complicated camera in between. The best part is, I don't worry about it. If I drop it overboard I'll just go out and get another.

The FM10 is a piece of junk in my experience. I forget who makes the camera, might be Cosina, but it's sold my Minolta and maybe Pentax among others with varying mounts and names. They're very flimsy and not durable at all. I've run in to countless broken plastic fantastics. They do work however so if you just want a really cheap SLR I guess there's worse you could buy. I personally think picking up a used SLR at the same price would be a better decision, something like an FM maybe. I'm not sure what the FM10 sells for.

Carl, sounds like you're knee deep in expensive photo gear.

 

The Sharp wristwatch I picked up at CVS for $19.99 is a "piece of junk" too, but it keeps deadly accurate time and I wear it everywhere. If it dies after a year or two, I'll just go back to CVS and get another. My $6,000 Rolex, on the other hand, has sat in the top drawer of my bureau for the last 10 years because, after hundreds of dollars of repair work, it still doesn't work. It never did keep accurate time despite its legendary Swiss "quality" and "durability."

 

The public is subjected to some incredible marketing hype. This story is a little off-topic but it illustrates my point: Years ago I went down in a submarine, the Alvin research sub at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute. I was with a marine geologist, Dr Charles Hollister (died a few years ago in a fall while climbing in Wyoming.) He had with him 2 Rolexes. He had talked Rolex into this scheme - he would take the Rolexes down in the sub, they would get to advertise the fact that the Rolexes went down to 6000 feet under the ocean, he would get to keep the Rolexes.

 

A few months later, the full page ads appeared in Narional Geographic and other magazines showing Dr Charles Hollister with his Rolexes that had just gone down to 6000 feet. The Alvin sub was pictured in the background. What wasn't mentioned was the the fact that the pressure and humidity inside the sub, where we and the Rolexes were, was very carefully controlled, not much different from being on the surface! I wonder how many men came home with a Rolex after seeing that ad convinced it would go down to 6000 feet.

 

Incidentally, in my years at Woods Hole, I used a Rollie medium format camera, best pictures I've ever taken.

 

Watches aren't cameras, I agree, but it's a matter of philosophy. If you get off fondling your finely crafted Teutonic Leica (mine's been in the Leica hospital twice for repairs) fine, get something more expensive. Or you can go on Ebay and pick up a used F3 for $400-$500. Then you can start replacing light seals and fixing whatever else is wrong with it. By the way, why ARE there so many F3's for sale on Ebay?

 

Galen Rowell used an FM10. A spread he had in National Geographic was shot with the FM10. I read a post on this site recently from some guy who was heading off to the rain forests of Central America with his FM10. I guess they just didn't know what a piece of junk the FM10 is.

 

In my opinion, is you want a durable, practical, no nonsense camera, get the FM10.

I have used both, the FM3A for almost 3 years now, and the FM10 for 6 months. Both are nice tools when used with quality glass though are not of comparable build quality -- the FM3A is head-and-shoulders above the FM10.

 

I would be glad to own 2 or 3 FM10s as cheap, MF, "afford-to-lose" F-mount SLR cameras **only if they had a clear B type focusing screen or at least replacable screens**. They one they have is a K-type and completely unusable with macros and teles with smaller than f4 aperture.

Arnab-

 

Build quality, build quality....what does that mean? A Mercedes has better "build quality" than my Toyota Tacoma, at least that's what we have been conditioned to believe by Mercedes, but my Toyota has 197,000 miles on it and it's never been in a garage except for brakes.

 

By the way, I find it quite easy to focus the split screen FM10 with the 50/f1.8 I have on it, and I have lousy vision.

"My $6,000 Rolex, on the other hand, has sat in the top drawer of my bureau for the last 10 years because, after hundreds of dollars of repair work, it still doesn't work..."

 

 

 

A bit off-topic, but heck, I paid $94 for a Rolex in 1966 and it continues to work. I was in the U.S. Navy then and it was almost one month's pay....but the stem now has a problem where it screws into the body. Had it been plastic, I guess some model airplane glue would fix it right up.

 

 

 

The FM10 is available for the third-world countries : some want a Nikon name on a camera but the 'real' economy there cannot move many $2,000 camera bodies.

By the way Arnab, I'm curious, why did you get the FM10 after owning the FM3a for 3 years?

Gerald-

 

I got my Rolex about the same time, the self-winding "Submariner" version. As I recall I paid $550 for it new. It ran for a few years, but I learned how to compensate for it, always adding 5 minutes to the time just to be safe.

 

I had the same problem with the stem, the "submariner's" stem rusts then breaks. Then if it gets wet, water leaks inside the stem hole and rusts out the interior.

 

Cost me $600 to get it fixed and it was at the Rolex shop in NY for 6 months. It ran ok for another year or two then the stem broke again.

 

I look at it now and then as a reminder not to get suckered into the "build quality" trap again. Sorry F3, Leica, Hassy, Deardorf, Mercedes, Volvo, Saab, et al.

Gerald, you write:

 

"The FM10 is available for the third-world countries "

 

That may very well be true, but I have a 3rd world mentality and budget so it's a good fit, for me anyway.

Bernard,

 

I bought my first FM3A 3 years ago and my first FM10 about 2.5 years ago. Used the FM10 for 6 months and then sold it to buy my second FM3A (2 years ago). Hope that's all explained.

 

Umm -- why I bought an FM10 on top of FM3A you ask? If you look at my portfolio, you'll see some critter shots and many of them were shot at quiet places in early morning where there is high risk of getting mugged with expensive camera gear. For some time I planned on having a low-cost setup and wanted to try FM10 + PN11 + Tamron 90 Macro. I never tried the FM10 with the 50mm/1.8 but I'm sure it will be great. Not sure if you ever tried out macros, but let me tell you a macro lens is bit of a pain to use with a K screen though it can certainly be done. So I had to let the FM10 go. My low cost setup is FM3A + PN11 + Tamron 90 Macro. Thankfully I've never been mugged yet.

 

Hope this is all clear as mud!! ;-) Happy shooting with whatever you shoot with.

Just curious -- what eactly is this "3rd world mentality" like?(because I myself am from this world #3)

I would look at another camera besides the FM-10. I frankly think the quality is just

too low on that camera. Although it is admittedly cheap, the meter of the one I

bought a few years ago

started acting up (gave weird readings when the shutter speed was 1/8 sec or less,

and was off 1-2 stops on other speeds) just after the warranty ran out, and the local

Nikon repair shop in DC said that it wasn't worth repairing. I have heard many other

stories of similar problems with the FM-10. Also, the viewfinder leaves much to be

desired. If you DO buy the FM-10, certainly don't buy the kit lens that comes with it

-- in my hands it was so bad that even 4x6 prints came out blurred!!

 

On the other hand, there are a number of fine Nikon MF cameras to consider. The

FM3a sounds wonderful, although I haven't used it. It is very similar to the FE-2 (last

made in 1983) - you can buy a used FE-2 in excellent condition from KEH.com for

$215. I have one that I bought from KEH and love it. The viewfinder is big and

bright, and it is a pleasure to use. The F3HP is also highly recommended for those

who wear glasses -- you can get this professional grade camera in excellent

condition from KEH for $415. There are other fine MF cameras as well you can pick

up new or used. Just remember you can't use G lenses with any of the MF cameras.

 

Bernard and I have exchanged notes on the FM-10, and as his posting illustrates,

some work fine and do the job they are intended to well. I should add that my

complaint is not the plastic body material, which I agree can be tough. But it is rather

aimed at other components that seem to break way too much and the poor

viewfinder.

 

Enjoy, whatever you buy.

 

Bob Y.

Marty,

 

Both cameras will do the job nicely - but I am not sure they will both provide you with the same level of pleasure. Of the two, I know I like the FM3A better - it just feels nice.

<p>

Were I to buy a manual focus film camera today, though, I would take a close look at the F3, which offers you more flexibility than the FM10 or FM3A; I am thinking in particularly at the mirror pre-release capability, the 100% view and the exchangeable view finders.

<p>

If you have an interest in autofocus, then I would take a look at the F100. Someone mentioned the F4 in this post, and it is indeed a very beautiful camera (and one of my favorites:-) but the autofocus really shows its age today (it is <U> really</u> slow by today's standards).

<p>

Hope it helps,

M

Bob, I think you are right with the statement "Enjoy, whatever you buy."

 

I'm not an expert on Asian religions by any means but I understand there is a concept called Tao which refers to a certain rightness and harmony to things. For me, the FM10 has the right Tao for the kind of work I do. I enjoy mine immensely and I hope it lasts a while (knock, knock.)

Arnab-

 

I do not mean to be disrespectful with the term "third world mentality" by any means, quite the opposite.

 

To me it means a practical, no nonsense, get the job done attitude, something highly respected by many in the "first" world.