45mm P Madness !

I have always considered myself a fan of the 45mm Tessar design having owned a

45mm GN in the late 70s...I have been looking for a Black 45mm P for a couple

of years now and stumbled across an auction on ebay...1 day out and the lens

is over $400...I'll bet it will be mid $500s when it finishes!

 

And a few weeks ago on eBay another auction with a chrome lens and chrome FM3A

body went for $1250.

 

In my opinion...if Nikon Owners are THIS desirous of a lens Nikon should re-

introduce it! Then I might be able to afford it.

 

Cheers!

 

George Goodroe CFP

St. Petersburg, FL USA

If you can not afford one second hand, why would you expect to afford a new one?

I still think the 45/2.8 AI-p and FM3A were pure whimsy on Nikon's part, along with the limited edition rangefinder replicas. When I bought a black 45 demo for just under Cdn$300 a couple years back, friends thought(knew)I was crazy. It's a great little lens, sure, but is it worth $500? Maybe. Its nascent "cult" status will probably lead to insane asking prices before settling down to extortionate prices. The lens drew wide yawns from nearly everyone when it debuted, as did the FM3A.

"If you can not afford one second hand, why would you expect to afford a new one?"

 

The law of supply and demand: increase supply and the market-cleraing price will drop.

Thanks Robert...my thoughts exactly!

Funny thing about these small cameras and lenses is that they fetch such high price. A Ricoh GR21 21mm point and shoot fetched over $1,400 USD

on ebay last week, crazy when a Nikon F5 with 21mm lens would be less money. Look what Leica CM, Contax T3, Hexar AF and other small cameras go for and compare them to F100, Fe2, or any other nice regular size slr. Even Hasselblads and Pentax MF cameras are way discounted in relation to their original purchase price, usefulness as a tool and quality of construction.

Small digital cameras can not compete with film. I don't think that they will deliver similar results anytime soon. That is why the prices are high. Small cameras are not manufactured anymore....

I've got a mint silver 45/2.8 P with matching hood, NIC filter and caps I'd sell for $300 if anyone's interested.

Those GR21s sure are nice tho'. Tiny, and quality comparable to good Nikkor glass.

George, I've owned a lot of GN's, and still have two of them--both AI. One is mint that has some dork's name on it and use all the time, and the other is my perfect mint specimen. This is one of the sharpest Nikkors I've owned, yet everytime I bring up the subject on the forum, everyone tells me what dogs they were. It leads me to presume most have not really used the 45 GN, and people's opinions are swayed by "legend".

 

I've also wanted a P version, but even new they were going for about $399 I believe. The used prices never came down. They also didn't have the GN feature, which I found useful. I've since found some comfort in the wonderful 50mm f/1.8, but it still isn't as small as the 45's. Also, forget TTL metering. I've used my SB-11 potato masher flash with the 45 GN, which selects the aperture based on distance and GN, and I've never had such beautiful flash images.

It is madness indeed. For that price, one can buy a dozen of 50/1.8 E lens. I doubt anyone could tell the difference under 13x19. If I had to pick one in terms of optical performance, I'd go with the tried-and-true 50/1.8 E in its 6 elements in 5 groups design than 45 with Tesser design. BTW, the 50/1.8 E and later 50/1.8 Nikkor are quite small too.

The Tessar design is tried and true, too. It is, in fact, an older design.

You just don't get the same sort of images form 50mm. People don't fall in love with optical design of this lens, rather the pictures they get from it (although optics have a lot to do with it). It's mostly people who hasn't tried it tends to dismiss on the basis of optical design.

 

Although $500 for a second hand is getting a little fanatical.

I like my P version because it's small and un-intimidating for nice candid portraits. I wouldn't say it's better that the 50mm 1.4, just different and nice quality about the image.

<br><br>

I thought it would make for a compact macro set, but I was surprised to find that I cannot attach an extension tube, or TC for that matter, because of the raised black knob on the back. Does anyone know that purpose of the raise knob? thanks, Paul

The Nikkor 45mm/f2.8 P lens was never near $399 when it was available new. As recently as mid 2005, about a year and half ago, it was available new for $250 at B&H. The problem was that back then, it was considered to be very expensive for a relatively slow (f2.8), 4-element standard (near 50mm) lens. Its current price on eBay is certainly insane, but on eBay, there are a lot of sucker deals; I have heard multiple times that prices have gone over brand new prices available from B&H.

 

See these threads for some details:

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00C6J0

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00CANY

 

For those who want it so badly, I wonder why they didn't spend that $250 a couple of years back.

"--For that price, one can buy a dozen of 50/1.8 E lens. I doubt anyone could tell the difference under 13x19--"

 

I have both the 45/f2.8 and the 50/f1.8. I have tested the two side by side on a tripod, same roll of film, same camera, just swapping the two lenses back and forth.

 

I found, while resolution is about the same, the 45/f2.8 has much better color and contrast. I also prefer the 45's slightly wider view angle, especially for landscapes.

 

Regarding size, you really don't save much with the 45 over the 50, maybe an eight of an inch in length.

 

The 45/f2.8 mounted on a fm10 or fm2n makes the perfect poor man's Leica. Put in a roll of Astia and you have the perfect travel camera.

The FM3A, 45P and Rangefinder replicas were pretty much just for collectors, similar to (and I know I'm going to catch hell for this) the Hermes Leica and Oscar Barnack Leica, (or pretty much any Leica ever made, at this point).

 

The companies know that there is a built in market for these cameras, and that they will sell for absurdly high prices, so they capitalize on that.

 

You can't really blame them, though. More $$$ for them means good news for us (ideally, anyway).

Thanks, Bernard. That's good information to know. BTW, is your test done on a 50/1.8 E or a Nikkor 50/1.8 short nose?

Tong:

I'm not familiar with either of those lenses. My 50/1.8 is an AIS manual focus that I bought from BH three or four years ago.

"I found, while resolution is about the same, the 45/f2.8 has much better color and contrast."

 

Yes, I agree, at least when comparing my 45 P to the following 50mm lenses:

 

a) 50mm f1.4 AF (non D)

 

b) 50mm f2.0 AI

 

I have used other 50mm f.18 and f1.4 AI models in the past, and I don't remeber any of them having color or contrast as good as the 45/f2.8 P either.

In response to:

 

"The FM3A, 45P and Rangefinder replicas were pretty much just for collectors, similar to (and I know I'm going to catch hell for this) the Hermes Leica and Oscar Barnack Leica, (or pretty much any Leica ever made, at this point). The companies know that there is a built in market for these cameras, and that they will sell for absurdly high prices, so they capitalize on that."

 

There's nothing to capitalize on in this kind of market. Nikon lost money on every FM3A, S3 2000 limited edition and SP 2005 limited edition rangefinder they sold - moreso with the rangefinders (esp. the SP!). Luckily Nikon is a company run by engineers who love their products instead of marketing people, otherwise we wouldn't have even seen these cameras. Nikon's bread and butter is the high volume DSLRs and P&S digital cameras.

To John De Cristofaro and Jon Manjiro:

 

I agree with you that Nikon probably lost money on every FM3A and 45mm P lens they sold, that surely explains the short production life of both products.

 

But I have to disagree with John where he says the FM3A was just for collectors. I think that applies to the rangefinder replicas S3 2000 and SP 2005, most of them were probably bought to sit in a display window, never to be used. I can of course only speak for myself, but I did get the FM3A new about 4 years ago and it is a very capable camera. I still use it quite often and it's a joy to use, not up to the F3 standard, but then those cameras do not compete in the same class.

 

According to Wikipedia and the mir.com.my webpage, the original FM had a production life from 1977 to 1982, the FM2(n) from 1982 to 2001. The FM and FM2 have always been regarded as excellent cameras or back-up cameras, why is that now so different with the FM3A?

 

Allow me to quote Wikipedia:

 

"During the mid 1990s, a demand arose among some photographers for a quality manual-focus alternative to the 35 mm autofocus SLR camera. These cameras required complex computer and processing mechanisms, and especially in their amateur and consumer versions, were not known for either for ruggedness or long service life. Nikon owners began to demand a durable, precision-made camera with the AE electronic features and prized construction of the discontinued Nikon FE-2, which had begun to skyrocket in value on the secondhand market. Nikon responded to this phenomenon with a revival of their classic FM/FE series design.

 

The FM3A's deliberately limited but tightly focused features were not intended to appeal to most photographers. Nikon believed that serious film photographers were not interested in every possible automated bell and whistle, but rather the highest possible quality and precision of control, and a service life estimated not in years, but decades.

 

Unfortunately, the FM3A came out at the beginning of a major technological revolution in photographic technology digital imaging. Virtually all new photographers, professional and amateur alike, found digital camera convenience preferable to film, resulting in a huge decrease in film SLR sales. Annual sales of digital cameras surpassed those of film cameras in 2004. Though FM3A sales remained steady, they were minuscule compared to Nikon's other cameras, and increasing costs forced Nikon announced discontinuation of the FM3A on 11 January 2006. (...) Despite this, as problems have begun to emerge with the discovery of numerous price, reliability and operational problems of digital SLR cameras (expense, crop factors, sensor malfunction in long exposures, dust/heat damage, fragility and susceptibility to moisture, extensive computer and printer support requirements) the appeal of digital cameras as a solution for any and all SLR camera owners has begun to wear off, and the value on the secondhand market of the FM3A and other high quality 35 mm cameras have begun to increase appreciably." End of quote.

 

Describing the FM3A as just a collector's item is being a little bit unfair towards the whole FM line, which span almost 30 years. "Nikon's bread and butter is the high volume DSLRs and P&S digital cameras." True. But we should be grateful to Nikon for having produced this camera, even if it was clear from the start it would only appeal to a niche market. I think it would have been a very popular camera had it been launched five years earlier.

 

As for the 45mm P, I could not justify the cost of buying it new, as I already owned two 50mm lenses that gave me complete satisfaction. Today's prices are ridiculous, I wouldn't pay 500 dollars for something that could be bought for half the price a few years ago.

 

No hard feelings John, everyone is entitled to their opinion. What may be the perfect camera and lens combo for me may not work for you, and vice versa. As long as manufacturers split us up in target groups and produce cameras that fit into those categories, everyone will be able to pick up the gear he needs or likes to use.

 

Happy shooting.

 

Jan

 

Jan, thanks for your considered response! Regarding the FM3A being a collectors item, I didn't go there in my previous post because John is entitled to his opinion, but I love my two FM3As as shooters. Of the four Nikon SLR bodies I own, the two FM3As are always the cameras I take with me when travelling (can't beat two FM3A bodies, three primes and a stash of slide film for travelling!). That's why I wrote "Luckily" in front of "Nikon is a company run by engineers who love their products instead of marketing people, otherwise we wouldn't have even seen these cameras". My FM3As have both now got their share of small dings and marks on them, so they're no good to a collector anymore. Guess I'll just have to keep using them for their intended purpose :-) Regarding the 45mmP, I purchased a new black one in Tokyo just recently. It wasn't cheap, but I knew I'd never get the chance to buy a new one again, ever, so I grabbed it. It's a very nice performer so I'm happy.

Hi Jon,

 

Sorry, I should have read your post more carefully. I'm glad to see you enjoy your FM3As so much. It is also my ideal travel camera, it never lets me down, is still on its first set of batteries and also has the small dents you describe. We may even get to a point where a used FM3a with dents and brassing becomes more valuable because it looks old.

 

I'm actually going backwards in time. My first Nikon was the F801s (N8008s), because at the time I thought I absolutely needed to have autofocus, matrix metering and TTL flash. Although I don't deny these features are useful under certain circumstances, for my type of shooting I usually had them switched off anyway. So when the FM3a came out, I bought it because it offered all I needed and nothing more than I needed. I then added a mint F3HP to my gear and enjoy that camera even more. There certainly is a market for rugged, reliable and small cameras. We may be a minority, rowing up-stream, but I enjoy my cameras and the results I'm getting.

 

I hope you enjoy your 45mm P. It certainly looks the part on a manual camera, but as I already have 7 prime Nikkors, it would be a very unreasonable purchase for me. But then some of my purchases have not been very reasonable either.

 

regards

 

Jan

"I have been looking for a Black 45mm P for a couple of years now and stumbled across an auction on ebay...1 day out and the lens is over $400...I'll bet it will be mid $500s when it finishes!"

 

The 45mm P lens can still be bought new at B&H, only in the silver version though and grey import for 289.95 dollars. I would definitely prefer buying a new lens from a reputable dealer over a used 400 dollar lens on ebay.

 

Now that we're on the subject of prices, I've been searching the B&H and KEH web pages for some current prices on second hand equipment.

 

B&H have an FM3a in grade 9 condition for 799 dollars. A mere 40 dollars more will buy you a 9+ condition F5 at 839 dollars. If I had 800 dollars burning a hole in my pocket, I sure would go for the F5.

 

An F3HP in excellent+ condition at KEH is only 465 dollars. A black F2AS in the same condition is 1,035 dollars!

 

F3s and F5s seem to be flooding the market at the moment, so you have a wide choice and prices are very affordable, especially if you think what the F3 and F5 used to cost when they were still available new. FM3a, F2AS and original F Nikons seem to be very sought after items, so prices are extremely high.