F3 or FM3A?

If price did not matter and overall condition was about the same, what would you buy: F3 or

FM3A?

Given those choices I'd buy the FM3a because I need/want a manual focus camera, and it has three features my N70 lacks. 1/250 flash sync, sort of mirror lock-up, and DOF preview. Once I had those three features then I'd like a F3 for the optional viewfinders and real mirror lock-up. In reality I don't care about TTL flash, or really need a manual focus camera with aperture priority. I intend to buy a FM2n, then maybe a F3 or an F with standard prism.

If it was my only camera, the FM3a.

To me, the F3 is better in every way except the slow flash synch.

I especially like the ergonomics on the F3, the grip and extra weight help me keep it steady at lower speeds. I use an FE2 for flash.

FM3a. Used to have an F3. Great camera except I found myself using manual metering most of the time and the tiny little +/- display in the viewfinder to meter with was a pain.

 

Thought you were preparing to switch to a Leica R?

I'd go for the F3HP in a second, because I can easily see all four

corners of the viewing screen at once (I wear glasses due

to astigmatism). I also like the ability to use a waist-level

finder, and I really prefer the fast, quiet, reliable

MD-4 over the relatively noisy, slow, jam-prone MD-12.

The F3 feels much sturdier than the FM/FE series, too.

<p>

The FM3A has faster flash sync, that nice match-needle

meter display, and a standard hot shoe on top of the prism,

but these aren't enough to make me give up the F3. I'd

seriously consider it as a second camera to supplement

the F3, though.

Hi Olivier!<P>

 

I'm with Richard on this. If fast flash synch and match-needle metering (and a fully functional shutter without batteries) are key concerns, go with the FM3A. If those concerns are secondary, and the first priority is build quality and operational elegance, you can't beat the F3. Your best bet is to have both.

Olivier,

 

Well if you dont mind me adding a different camera, how about an F4? Interchangable finders, decent AF and it still works well with MF lenses, great screens and build quality. Heavy but very flexible IMO. I have read about you having problems with your eyesight, having AF ability could -in some conditions- be worthwile. I myself use a F801s for the electronic rangefinder sometimes, even my youthfull eyes cannot focus fast enough in some situations.

 

If the choise has to be between the F3 and FM3a i would go for the F3, im pretty much a slave to the finders and sceens by now.....

 

Greetings,

Richard and Doug have pretty much said it all, however I'd just add that the F3 also boasts a "ratcheted" film wind lever (just like the Leica M's) that allow you to "inch" the film on, also a much wider selection of interchangeable focusing screens.

 

Reading your previous posts I get the impression you're frustrated with the Leica M's as a spectatcle wearer and were considering a Leica R. I went exactly the same route and eventually sold my Leica R outfit in favour of Nikon, in particular Nikon F3HP's and F5's for crystal clear, corner-to-corner visibility of those wonderful 100% sized screens. Mirror slap's a little more than you'd be used to after a Leica M, so I'd also endorse a previous post's comments regarding the vibration absorbing qualities of the MD4 motor drive.

 

If you really want to luxuriate in a huge, bright, easy to focus, viewfinder image try the F3 with the rigid "chimney" style viewfinder, the image is laterally reversed and it's only really practical in the horizontal format, but the focus accuracy is so micron perfect at wide apertures that I regularly use it for hand-held, close up portraits.

 

One final alternative, the much repected British writer on classic cameras, Ivor Matanle, has frequently recommended the Minolta SRT101 and SRT303 for spectacle wearers (they may have been named differently outside Europe), you could pick one of these up for next to nothing. I had the opportunity to try one recently and he's absolutely right, brilliant corner-to-corner screen visibility!

Have you considered the FA? I understand it lets you use a wider selection of Nikon lenses (the G lenses). What are the FA's drawbacks?

Thanks for your help, guys. I'm trying to «rationalize» (is there really any rationale behind our

photographic endeavours, anyway?) my equipment, of which I have too much. And yes, Gary

and Todd, I am considering switching to Leica R. But I also have quite a a good deal already

invested in Nikon, lenses and bodies (including a D100, which I consider my easy (albeit heavy

and cumbersome) AF system for those days when I feel lazy, digital and impatient. I usually

don't like AF much, though my eyesight recommends it.

 

Actually I already own an F3, which I really love, but I also have an FM2n, which I'm considering

selling. I was wondering if I should sell my F3 along in favor of an FM3A. Here is what I'm

considering: I'd keep a Nikon system, D100 and one manual body (F3 or FM3A, that was the

main question), a Leica SLR system (WA, 50, 90?) and a Contax G2 system I already have,

which would combine AF with (kind of) RF needs.

 

Does that make sense? Sorry if I look like the living proof that too much of a good thing... etc...

Gee boy, you seem to be rich....

If so, you won`t mind another version of how to spend your money.

Forget about the Leica and Contax stuff. A MF will show you a lot of real picture quality.

For compactness I did stick to Nikon. If you intend to work a lot with (different) flashlights, the F3 might be a pain in the ass.... a FE2 would be a better choice. I don`t know the FM3A, but it simply seems to expensive (but that doesn`t matter anyway, i reckon.)

After all I`d not trade my F3 for anything, even I don`t use my waist level (6x6 is simply better here) nor the winder (the F100 got one)nor the different focusing screens. But I`m never afraid in the dark, because if necessary the F3 is great to hit anybody who might want to rob it.

Martin, are you kidding? I'm not rich, I'm broke. Where do you think my hard earned money

ends up? ;-)

Olivier, re Henk's post: Perhaps because of Phillip Greenspun's

entertaining pan of it, the F4 is never mentioned without the

adjective "Heavy." But fitted with the MB20 it isn't any heavier than

the F3HP+MD4. I owned and liked an F3 but the F4 is a much more

capable MANUAL camera. A truly rational outfit would consist of an

F4/MB20 and an FM3A, sharing a suite of manual nikkors including a

45mm f2.8P for when you need a camera you can stick in your pocket

for street shooting. Eliminate the Leica and the Contax, and thanks to

the F4's faux-analog design, you'd have basically the same control

layout to avoid confusion when using two bodies

together...............

If you're considering Leica R, why not just buy it? It's only the least cost-effective way to make photographs ever devised... The amount of Nikon gear you'd have to sell to afford the $2000 50/1.4 would surely drive down the market for me! And the bodies are so light and reliable that the only R user I know carts his around in a steel case and has a Nikon for when he might bang them up.

 

But all you really need is an MM adapter for the G2, and then you can buy all of those soon-to-be-orphaned Contax MM lenses and use them instead of an SLR.

 

In all honesty, you've got a lot of money tied up in 35mm equipment and you're going digital. Dump the G2, the F3, the FM2n, your manual focus lenses, buy an extra D100, and let us reap the rewards.

Although I prefer the FM3a, one thing you might want to consider is that Voigtlander/Cosina has a version of their wonderful 15mm Heliar lens that will fit Nikons with mirror lock-up...the F2, F3, F4.

Olivier,<P>

 

I hadn't realized you have so much gear, for so many systems. That might change my answer.<P>

 

I understand the allure of equipment. And of different systems. And if I had the cash, you can bet I'd be well into Leica - both RF and SLR. And probably Contax - both 35mm and medium format. Speaking of which, some Hasselblad gear would be nice - especially those bodies that come in colors. And I'd probably like one each - no, make that <I>two</I> each - of the Nikon F-series bodies. And an assortment of lenses, in each system. Hell, I might even get into autofocus.<P>

 

But, because I'm cash poor, I have to practice a kind of triage with regard to spending decisions (lunch? or film?). This in the end is a good thing, really, as it keeps me focused on priorities. I don't know, of course, what your priorities are; but I'd like to recommend that you consider leaving well enough alone: instead of yet more gear, how about a month shooting in Africa? or China? or South America? The northeast part of India has 300-some different tribal groups and is one of the most remote areas on earth. If you have the means, you can get a permit for a ten day visit and hire a helicopter to carry you in and out. Likewise, the Kingdom of Bhutan is aching to be photographed by some sharp-shooting, well-heeled someone. The only way to visit is the official way. Cost? $200 a day, including food and transport inside the country. Potential images: priceless.<P>

 

I'm sure you have your own dream lands. That, if I were you, is where I'd consider putting my next dollar, rather than buying more gear. Just a thought.

Doug, you may be right. I have to confess I love cameras as much as I love making photos.

But, I'm not into buying more gear, in fact I'm trying to sell gear, and keep only what I think I truly

like... and...errr... need. Actually, give me the name and address of somebody who will buy

most of my equipment in one shot, for a reasonable price, and he has himself a deal.

I just got a FM3a and it is a jewel of a camera. Getting all the way to 1/4000 with no battery is amazing in today's world. And the camera is extremely small and all metal, so has a good solid feel to it.

 

I have two ofhet Nikons, a F2AS and a FE, both 22 years old, so I figured I'd get the FM3a before Nikon abandoned (I hope not) the all manual line. It seems that most manufacturers are going with electronic shutters of some sort. The FM3a is not that expensive when compared to what's out there in terms a of quality camera.

 

Best of luck. You seem to have a lot of systems!

Olivier, Sorry to intrude again, but what lenses do you use with the D100? Do you use any manual lenses with it?

Vikram, I use only AF (sometimes in manual focus) Nikkor lenses, preferably D, because the

D100 won't work with non-electronic lenses. It won't even fire the shutter. That's too bad,

actually, because there seems to be so many good older manual AI or AI-S Nikon lenses. Like

the famous f:2.5 105 mm.

BTW, J.O. I am not entirely converted to digital, I like film so much. But I had no idea there

existed an MM adaptor for Contax G2. That could answer a lot of questions, and narrow

everything down to the G2, which, as you know, has but a limited range of lenses. Can you tell

me more about it? Thank you.

xxx