Nikon FM3a vs FE2

Given that a mint condition FE2 costs half the price of a new FM3a, I

am interested in what people think regarding the worth of the FM3a

against the FE2.

 

I realise that the Nikon FM3a has some nice touches as compared with

the FE2, vis a vis, full manual functionality (despite the fact that

without a battery is there anyone who can honestly claim to be able to

guage the available light and required exposure settings), DX coding

and the window at the back to read the film ISO currently installed,

AE-lock button in a very convenient position, and last but certainly

not least, the current availability of Nikon spare part replacements

held in the factory.

 

For example, does anyone know if the internal mechanism and outer body

materials are more dependable on the newer system, or is there a

certain cost-cutting involved in these modern times?

 

Yes, my motivation is to read enough to convince me to save myself

spending as much for an FM3a, as would effectively buy me a mint

condition FE2 and an excellent lense in addition.

 

Peter

FM3a (before that FM2n) as claimed by Nikon has vibration dampening stuff built in which makes the shutter (not the mirror slap) quieter.

 

If you want a camera without much electronics as in the case of FM3a, consider an FM2n.

About 18 months ago I purchased a mint black FE2 for $300 and found the following build quality differences: 1.) the clear eyepiece lens was AR coated on the FE2 but not the FM3A. 2.) the split image RF aid was not as crisp and contrasty on the FM3A due to a design change by Nikon which allows reduced blackout at smaller apertures. If your lenses are f/4.5 and faster, the screen for the FE2 is better. I've seen the same split image RF change on screens for the Nikon F4. 3.) A minor point was the nameplate over the prism. It looks cheaper and more platically on the FM3A than the FE2. I personally like the position of the memory lock more on the FE2 because it falls more naturally with your fingers.

The last FE2 rolled off the line 20 years ago.A 20 year old "anything mechanical", is on borrowed time untill a rebuild.The rebuild will cost you the savings difference.

 

I would go with the newer FM3.This way you are assured of 20 years of no trouble.This series of cameras has been time proven.

A couple of years ago, when the FM3a was introduced, I was jumping for joy. As a long time Nikon user, and a person that prefers manual cameras and lenses, it was welcome news in a plastic and digital auto-focus heavy industry.

 

Since 1985, I had been using two FE2 cmaeras, and when I saw the specs on the FM3a, I felt it should have been called the FE3m. In most ways, operationally, it was an FE2 with a mechanically operationl shutter (when needed). Here is the thing... that mechanically operating shutter feature is transparent if you have good batteries.

 

I want to support Nikon for being brave enough to bring out a camera that is not in the top rung of popularity these days, but when it came time to pull out the wallet, I could not help to notice that my 20 year old FE2s are still perfectly operational. They remain my camera today for 75% of my shooting.

 

If I lost them tomorrow, or they died, I'd get a new FM3a. If I didn't have any camera, I'd get an FM3a. But having full functioning FE2s instead does not limit me in anyway... as long as I have good batteries with me.

I have FE2's, FM3a's and FM2's. First off, the FE2 went out of production in 1989, so there are a number of them out there less than 20 years old. Many of them were lightly used by amateurs and need nothing more than the mirror and film door foam seals replaced.

 

There are a number of differences between the three cameras besides the manual aspect. The FM3a uses the same aluminum alloy shutter blades as the FM2s that were made after 1990. They were developed for the 8008 camera which has a top shutter speed of 1/8000 of a sec. I would consider this a design improvement over the titanium shutter blades. The FM3a uses a chrome plated brass lens mount instead of the stainless steel used on the earlier cameras. The manually select shutter speeds on the FM3a go down to 1 sec., rather than 8 an the FE2. The optics for the ADR are different with the result that the aperture setting numerals seen in the viewfinder is smaller in the FM3a. I like the added features of the FM3a (fill flash button, DX encoding and no film back interlock). I am pretty sure that there have been other internal changes made. The FM3a has a smoother film advance and is a bit quieter.

Depends on your cash flow, but I'd say a clean used FE2 will provide you with 90% of what

an FM3a can do at about half the cost. For a really good side by side comparison, see this

link:

http://makeashorterlink.com/?W3691209A

I had an FM3a. It's a superb camera. Worth the price difference between it and a used FE2? Only you can say. Functionally they are fairly similar, except for the manual operation, as you say.

 

QUOTE FROM ORIGINAL POST

is there anyone who can honestly claim to be able to guage the available light and required exposure settings

UNQUOTE

 

Absolutely. You should practice it. It becomes almost like second nature, and it's a great way to really start looking at and understanding the light.

I would claim the same thing that Albert and Russ did.

 

And I would add the FM2n to the list in case you don't use flash much and enjoy photographing in low light situations. The needle meter on both FE2 and FM3A iwould be very hard to be seen then.

 

And I also find that the FM2n feels ergonometrically better.

 

Good luck

in low light situations, seems like the 8-sec metered exposure of the FE2 would be pretty useful compared to the FM2n's 1-sec max metered exposure. Agreed it's a pain not being able to read the needle. Even my Stylus Epic does 4-sec night exposures, which comes in handy all the time.

 

I'm doing the same comparison myself right now, overall the no-battery B setting (for star trails), 8-sec metering, and sub $200 prices at KEH makes FE2 the winner for me.

I meant low light handheld situations like an indoor event, club, etc where you oftenly have light and dark areas. Sorry for the incomplete information.

 

And for night shots like star trails, fireworks etc you'd need more 8 sec anyway, although 8 sec it's obviously an advantage. Maybe a lit needle 8 sec meter would be the solution.

 

regards.

Quote: "is there anyone who can honestly claim to be able to guage the available light and

required exposure settings"

 

For daylight look up "sunny 16 rule" on Google. At night just open the lens as far as it will

go and set the shutter as slow as you dare. It works surprisingly well (with Tri-X at least).

 

Back on-topic, I almost bought an FM3a recently, but opted for a used F3 instead. Same

price but I fell for the F3's viewfinder.

Buy a Nikon F off of eBay for $100 add a cheap hand held light meter and become a real

photographer. Hey, F8 has always been f8

First, if you have trouble estimating exposure find one of those little cardboard exposure dials and carry it around for a while - it will help build your confidence in estimating exposure, and yes it is quite possible to be pretty accurate much of the time.

 

I have a FE2 which I like a lot, but as a backup I still prefer a Nikkormat FT3 - one that is in good condition should not be that expensive (unless you want collector quality), and will mount all of your lenses (plus the AI finger swings out of the way so you can mount NAI lenses or various odball lenses that would otherwise be a problem). This is really an all mechanical camera with center weighted metering and is just a pleasure to handle and use. I recently bought a couple of more on the dreaded internet auction, and think I have backup for ever now. And it gives me a connection with my first Nikon (1968) which was a Nikkormat.

 

Stephen

Thank you for the comments thus far. I feel already somewhat humbled these echoes of experience, especially regarding my suggestion that the ability to personally gauge the levels of available light and estimate the shutter speed, is not realistic.

 

I am investigating the FE2 not in order to shy entirely away from electronic intervention, indeed, the restriction I find with the FM2 is that it is without Aperture Exposure automation and therefore a slower to work with (I can already hear those echoes of experience sounding against my rash naiivety).

 

My interest is largely to be able to minimize battery use whilst travelling in South East Asia. If the Nikon F6 were as lean on power consumption and didn't cost 2000 Euros, then I would happily use and probably even cherish the sophistication.

 

I [at first] will use my only lens, a Nikon AF-D 28mm f/1.4 which has so far been permanently attached to a D70, so this is another reason for choosing only manual cameras not from an earlier period of production.

 

I also expect to mainly use black and white film, since I [choose to] imagine [and hope] that such a format will help to concentrate my attention on the surrounding light, due to working with the inherent simplicity of the two-tone medium.

 

There is of course an additional appeal to working with a camera such as the FE2, but that is something I suspect all of you know already very well. Whereas I for now, will only imagine...

 

Peter

For most people having auto exposure available is a very good thing for quick shooting. Battery life is very good on FE2s, or the FM3a, or the FM2, because the meter turns off after 30 seconds. The batteries are small and light anyway so it's not a problem to carry a spare set with you. Silver oxide or lithium button battereies will last for several years of shooting.

Bruce,

 

Your paragraph essentially summarises my basic requirements in a manual camera, i.e. Aperture Exposure automation (in truth, I require it less for the sake of speed and more as a secondary mode of assistance) and batteries which last more than a year and a spare is so small that it is burden all to keep alongside the spare camera film one carries.

 

Perhaps the final conclusion, if not answer, to my original question, is that the FM3a is built to a standard that benefits from newer technology, such as the shutter mechanism with its vibration reduction capability and use of more recently designed materials.

 

It may also be the case that the light meter benefits from technological advances, using more efficient circuitry and calibration algorithms, but for now I have no details on this.

 

Certainly, as I first stated, there are some useful functions which are not present on the FE2. Certainly an FE2 in very good condition is as functional as I need for use as a light box.

 

I guess I'll just have to see what happens, when I walk into the camera store and I open my wallet!

 

Peter

 

p.s. If plastic slides out of my wallet instead of paper, and I walk out of the shop with a Nikon F6, I'll try to compose the information here with as much humble naiivety as I find possible to write...

"p.s. If plastic slides out of my wallet instead of paper, and I walk out of the shop with a Nikon F6, I'll try to compose the information here with as much humble naiivety as I find possible to write..."

 

If you plan on spending $300-$500, and then walk into a store and drop $2000, then I've got some real-estate in Florida to sell you....

Have fun with whatver Nikon you choose, or chooses you.

A second-hand, black FM3A in mint condition from Grays of Westminster managed to divert me from any future Florida real estate deals...

 

Thanks to all for the discussion.

 

With kind regards,

 

Peter

This arrived from my camera repair tech today:

 

Russ ,

 

The FE-2 shutter control system was built around the FE FM original shutters. The FM3 moved to a plastic gear control assembly that with even moderate use begins to fail. The intermediate speeds. 30, 60, 125 start to hang up. Otherwise it’s a great camera.

 

Dave

I have found that the little lithium batteries last a very long time in the FE and FE-2 cameras. And they are impervious to extreme cold.

 

Russ

Russ, try looking at the posting dates before needlessly reviving these old threads.

 

There's the classic camera and 'modern' film camera fora for posting pictures of your pets.

[ATTACH=full]1273274[/ATTACH] I have found that the little lithium batteries last a very long time in the FE and FE-2 cameras. And they are impervious to extreme cold.

 

Russ

Please note the original post is from 2005, the poster of the thread was last seen in 2010.

Since the discussion has already been restarted, I will mention that the FE2 that I have,

bought used a few years ago, seems to work fine, except that the meter calibration is

about two stops off. i just set the exposure offset appropriately and it works fine,

but I do wonder sometimes.

 

As someone mentioned the FT3, I also have one of those, which seems to work fine,

including the meter being close.