differences between FM and FM2?

I am trying to start a manual SLR outfit with a decidedly limited

budget. I have decided on either the Nikon FM or FM2. I'm hoping

that someone who is knowledgeable on the subject can specify the

exact differences between the two. The bottom line is this: The FM

seems to sell, on average for about 40% of the cost of an FM2. I'm

just trying to figure out if the FM2 is really worth paying more than

double or if I'll regret buying an FM instead of an FM2 later on.

 

Thanks in advance for any help.

You're probably actually shopping for an FM2n, not an

original FM2 (the FM2 had a very short production life,

and is somewhat rare). The difference between the FM2n and

FM2 is that the FM2 has 1/200 flash sync, while the FM2n has

1/250 flash sync.

<p>

Anyway, I own an FM which I purchased in 1980, and an FM2n

which I bought in 2001, 21 years later. The differences are

small, most significantly in the max shutter speed and flash

sync speed. The FM is in many ways a better camera,

including compatibility with non-AI lenses, and more parts

made of metal where the FM2n is plastic. Of course,

my FM also has an extra 21 years of wear on it, and I

suspect that sort of thing accounts for

much of the price difference between the models.

<p>

I examined my two cameras side by side and described all

the differences I could notice on

<a href="http://webs.lanset.com/rcochran/fmfm2n.html">this web page</a>. Note that most of the differences noted are

cosmetic with no real significance.

http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/htmls/models/htmls/slrmain8090.htm

 

that web page is a wealth of information on nikon cameras. there should most definitely be a list of the differences in features between the fm and the fm2n.

 

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/fefm.htm

 

that webpage also has an easy to read table of the major differences.

FM2 is not that rare used in the Toronto area. I have one. It is priced less than a FM2n usually. The top shutter speed and the shutter itself are major differences between the FM (have two of those) and the FM2.

You can change the focusing screens on the FM2 & FM2n, but not on the FM. The FM's screen seems a bit dim also, so that one reason why I prefer the FM2.

One difference that is not obvious: the gallium photocells used in the FM meter supposedly respond more accuratedly to

subjects that are predominately red than do the silicon cells used in the FM 2/Fm2n. Evidently red can fool silicon cells

into recommending either over or underexposure, I forget which............

On a "decidedly limited budget", I think the FM is the choice. It is a fine little camera. Put the difference in film/chemicals/paper, and you will be a better photographer.