What am I missing with the FM3A

<p>I have always heard and read great reviews on the FM3A. Recently I purchased an FM3A and have used it for the past 2 weeks. I am at a loss in understanding all of the praise that this camera receives. To me it is OK but nothing special. The viewfinder is a pain to use with glasses and is shamed by the finder on the F3. I do like the two needle system. The camera just does not feel as good in my hands as the F3.<br>

Am I missing something? Is the following and high prices based completely on the lower number of cameras that were produced or because it was Nikon's last manual camera? It can't be that it runs without batteries or in freezing temperatures. How many people really need that option?</p>

<p>I don't think you're missing anything. It's the most desirable of the FM/FE series cameras and combines their best features. But it's still part of a mid-range line, rather than a flagship pro body like the F3. The battery independence could be useful in a camera at least partly intended as a rugged pro backup body. Today, this might (rightly or wrongly) be seen as an indicator of longevity (anything that depends entirely on electronics to operate may be harder to repair in years to come). Personally, when I was in the market for this sort of camera, I was a bit put off by a design that seems actively hostile to left-eyed use (pull out the lever to turn on the meter, and poke yourself in the right eye!).</p>

<p>The FM3a was kind of a "classic" release by Nikon, it came out about the same time the commemorative edition of the Nikon S3 rangefinder came out. It baffled me too. It was on the cusp of digital and everyone knew it. It was expensive when it was released (I think the body retailed for $499), when everyone already had an FM2n or FE2, or better yet, and F3 or F100. I think Nikon lost money on the FM3a, it was discontinued just a few years after it was introduced. A niche camera for sure. I'd take a F3HP over the FM3a any day of the week as well. Just bizarre really, the FM3a. Maybe it was released for collectors?</p>

<p>The FM3A tends to be overrated because it was born to be a cult classic. Coming at the end of Nikon's production of film SLRs, while they were well into their production of dSLRs, the timing practically guaranteed legendary status that wasn't entirely earned in the same way the genuine classics like the F, F2, F3 and others earned that status in actual practice.</p>

<p>Good camera, had only recently been introduced when I switched from Canon FD to Nikon around 2002. But after handling one at a local shop I realized it didn't offer much more <em>for my purposes</em> than a good used FM2N or FE2 at a third the price of the new FM3A.</p>

<p>OTOH, it does offer certain distinct advantages that might be worthwhile to the enthusiast: the needle meter readout for folks who dislike the red LEDs of the FM2; TTL flash, a fairly unusual feature in a manual focus camera; auto-exposure with full manual override. Many of the advantages of the F3 (other than the viewfinder) with better implementation in a smaller, lighter package. And practically guaranteed resale value. In a sense, it's Nikon's equivalent to the Olympus OM-3, another enthusiast's camera that seems overvalued when the actual features are considered.</p>

<p>Re-reading my first three paragraphs, I think I just provided all the justification any enthusiast needs to buy and enjoy the FM3A. The very factors that make it seem overrated to some will endear it to others.</p>

<p>Collectibility often turns a relatively uncommon but competent item into an overpriced relic. Kinda like the 28mm f1.4. Is it really worth 4 grand?</p>

<p>I don't think anybody here thinks the 28mm 1.4 is worth what it is selling for online. Even when it was available for $1800, I thought it was too expensive. It's a 28mm lens folks, it won't do your laundry.<br>

Collectors are weird people. I've dealt with quite a few, and most of them are crackers as far as I am concerned. But they have money and they can spend it where they wish, I suppose.<br>

The FM3a is also fascinating, as it is the hybrid FM/FE camera. You get the all mechanical shutter, with an electronic timer attached for Auto control. Neat and weird at the same time. I'm sure tons of collectors or Nikon gearheads went right down to their local camera store and plunked down the cash for a pre-order. I never saw the need for it, but by then I was shooting medium format film and digital. Even now, I'd not pay more than a couple hundred for an FM3a, but they seem to command much higher prices than that in mint condition.<br>

I've never seen anyone actually using one in real life either.</p>

<p>I have a FM3a - to me it is a wonderful camera for travel, days out, careful compositions of flowers and scenery and the like. The metering is very accurate, the mechanisms are a joy to use and when used with the bottom half of the case (which has a grip inbuilt) it handles well.</p>

<p>What about the other models? Truth be told with the FM3a it was camera happiness at first use - and I really enjoy using mine even two years on.</p>

<p>FM2, FE2 and the like are cheaper but with photography I feel that low cost of an item is not an important factor in purchacing it - perhaps if I already had an FM2... well that would be another story, but I am fresh to Nikon and when a clean used example showed up I had it.</p>

<p>Keep using it - it will grow on you!</p>

<p>Ian</p>

<p>PS. I speak as someone who has only used film up to this point - perhaps if I had grown up with digital my enthusiasm and passion for manual Nikons would be somewhat diluted.</p>

<p>I was one who was on the wait list in Japan. I use mine regularly. I have one here with me and one in Japan now although I usually haul mine with me when I go back. It is far and away my favorite manual camera. I have most of the manual Nikons which I bought serially, not to collect but to use. I only have one that is a 'collector camera.' I wouldn't trade my FM3a with the 45 mm p lens it came out with for all my other manual Nikons, and yes, I have an F3HP. In addition to the capabilities already mentioned, I like its neat compact well-made size.</p>

<p>And for the record, I have seen quite a number of people using them. Many write on this forum about their FM3as when the topic comes up. In truth, I don't know anyone who has one as a collector's item.</p>

<p>Conni</p>

<p>David:<br>

I completely agree with your assessment. I too fell for the hyperbole. I went through two FM3a's at the time, but after a few months simply gave up on it and went back to F3HP/F100 combo. I sold them some time ago in disappointment.<br>

The FM3a is a well made little camera, but nothing special. It has too little viewfinder eye relief for me, very hard to see the meter in low light, and I found some of the controls, like the exposure lock and flash comp, very awkward in use.</p>

<p>I had been looking at a second manual focus body for my F3HP, and took an earnest look at the FM2 and FM3a. I came dangerously close to buying one online after reading all the positive comments about them, but thankfully thought the better of it and waited to handle one in person. That quickly put the debate to rest, for I'm a left eye shooter and as Richard Williams greatly put it:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Personally, when I was in the market for this sort of camera, I was a bit put off by a design that seems actively hostile to left-eyed use (pull out the lever to turn on the meter, and poke yourself in the right eye!).</p>

</blockquote>

<p>As much as I rely on my left eye, I'd like to keep my right eye intact too! Ultimately it's a situation of 'different strokes for different folks'. I don't understand why someone would pay more for the FM3a's with the price of the F3's in the gutter, but if you like it, then you like it. And if you don't... well there's always that great resale value everyone talks about.</p>

<p>I also have a black FM3A with a black 45AiP attachment and it really is as others indicated a joy to use. The shutter speed can be ratcheted all the way down to 1/4000s with or without batteries. I use mine 99% of the time with various B&W films. The DSLRs are exclusively used for color.</p>

<p>I'm also a left eye shooter, and before I had glasses I used an FE2 and an FM2n, and neither camera bothered me and I never got poked in the eye. You just have to turn your head a little more to avoid that.</p>

<p >I sense the frustration but am also baffled as to why you would purchase if there was any doubt about critical specs (eye-relief and viewfinder coverage) that are readily available. Perhaps you were unfamiliar with the body-size and finders of the FM/FE family, on which the 3a is premised? What, specifically, was it that you read and heard in the great reviews that prompted your purchase?</p>

<p > </p>

<p >I enjoy the FM3a primarily due to TTL flash metering, hybrid shutter and size. The match/needle makes flash-comp dead easy (depressing the dedicated button is awkward). I'm in the minority but do call on all shutter speeds in frigid temps. It has limitations (e.g. low-light meter reading) but also a nice feature-set that suits me well. I, too, am a fan of the F3 (and especially F2) but when size, weight and/or TTL flash are critical, I'll reach for the FM3A.</p>

<p>While not an ideal solution, the partly-out position of the film advance lever for metering with the FM-types can be avoided by using the MD-12 motor drive. Otherwise, as Dave Lee described, I just turn my head a bit since I'm a left-eyed shooter. But I have a squishy nose and that solution may not work for someone gifted with a proper nose.</p>

<p>Another slight advantage to the F3, since you don't have to mash your face against the camera to see the entire frame through the finder, and neither the meter nor the shutter release are locked by having the advance lever flush.</p>

<p>I think a person had to enjoy the FM or FE series to really appreciate the refinements in the FM3A. It is not a revolutionary camera though the hybrid shutter is fairly unique (I think the Pentax LX also had a hybrid shutter). It's a 3rd generation of a 20+ year old design. I bought my FM3A used ~7 years ago and have dragged it on several adventures without issue. I've used it at -20F in Prudhoe Bay Alaska on a few occassions and it has performed well. My camera is definitely a 'user' and I would probably replace it if disaster struck and it was broken beyond repair, lost or stolen. It is kinda like and old friend who isn't perfect but is dependable and doesn't need alot of special attention and is just fun to be with.</p>

<p>The bottom line: The FE and the FM are each 80% of the camera that the FM3a is for 10% of the cost. The FE2 and the FM2n are each 90% of the camera that the FM3a is for 20% of the cost.</p>

<p>The FM3a was designed and marketed to be a collectible. For everything except use with flash and use without any batteries, the F3 is a better camera. I'd rather use an F2 or an FM without batteries anyways.</p>

<p>For $700, you can buy an FM3a. For $250, you can buy BOTH an F3HP and an FM as a dead battery, light weight backup and have far more capability.</p>

<p>Apparently, the 'hybrid' shutter of the FM3a wasn't unique at all.</p><p></p><p><a href="http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/canonf1n/shutter/index.htm">Canon F1n</a>:</p>

<p><i>"If the battery suddenly fails and is removed from the camera, the New F-1 will still function at all speeds covered by mechanical control....Pentax LX works both ways just like the New F-1, from 1/2000 sec to X 1/75 sec and "B" setting."</p></i>

<p><br>

And the Pentax LX had TTL flash metering in addition to a 'hybrid' shutter:</p><p></p><p><a href="http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/pentaxlx/flash/index.htm">Pentax LX</a></p>

<p>I love my FM3A. It is the perfect compliment to my FM2N and my F3 along with my 28mm, 35mm, 50mm<br>

and extra 135mm. I keep the FM2 loaded with black and white, the FM3A with color print and the F3<br>

with slide. All three cameras have just enough similarities and differences that make manual shooting so<br>

enjoyable. I have never found the perfect camera but with all three there's not much more I could ask<br>

for. </p>

<p>Most has been said already, I'd just like to add that I love my FE/FM series cameras (I've got more than most people). The FE2 was my first "real" camera, bought brand new just after it was released in 1983.<br /><br />I'm a left eye shooter, too. Never had any problems with the film advance lever.<br /><br />From the original post: "To me it is OK but nothing special" - my exact feeling for the F3! Never really liked it (but I love the F4, my other favourite film camera).<br /><br />These days, of course, I shoot mostly digital. Too much hassle with film.<br /><br />Jarle</p>

<p>It's small, light, reliable and has good ergonomics in the viewfinder - all the information is there that you need to concentrate on the composition. The TTL flash is excellent, it's compatible with all but 'G' lenses and has interchangable focussing screens. I have an F3HP, F100, F4 and FM2n but I still like taking out my FM3a with a 35mm F2 when I want just a small light walkabout camera that can give me manual control and aperture priority. It lets me just get on with taking pictures without the technology getting in the way.</p>

<p>Until I discovered ebay 10 years ago and upgraded to FA and F4 and eventually F5, I owned an FM, FM2, FM2N, and F3 (and an utterly forgettable EM for a short period of time) - only the F3 is still around (the F5 too). I was fairly content with the FM series but still remember the day I realized that time had moved on - when my wife got her F100. Aside from more features and better ergonomics, the F100 sounded better too - the FM/MD-12 combo was outright noisy in comparison. I only noticed in passing the introduction of the FM3A in 2001 - had sold all the FM series cameras by then and no intention or desire to acquire one again. Between the FM/FE/FA cameras, I vastly preferred the FA; the F3 was a different beast altogether - and they came together in what I consider the best manual focus camera with conventional controls (knobs instead of LCDs) - the F4.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>The bottom line: The FE and the FM are each 80% of the camera that the FM3a is for 10% of the cost. The FE2 and the FM2n are each 90% of the camera that the FM3a is for 20% of the cost.<br>

The FM3a was designed and marketed to be a collectible.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I cannot say it any better than Dave Green. I still own the FE I bought in 1978, the year it was introduced, and I had an FE2 for 15 years. Therefore I am very familiar with those cameras. The fact of the matter is that the entire FM/FE series cameras are very similar; there are only relatively minor improvements from the 1977 FM to the 2001 FM3a in the span of a quarter century.</p>

<p>Over the years, the improvements such as 1/250 sec flash sync and TTL flash on the FE2 are nice but not critical. Therefore, if you expect the FM3a to be drastically different from the FM2/FE2 that cost a fraction of the price in the used market, you'll certainly be disappointed.</p>

<p>It is almost amusing to hear people's excuses to justify their purchase of the FM3a, such as it can work without any battery. I have been using AF and DSLR for two decades now, and I have never run out of battery even once. And I ask those same people what happens if they run out of film, and they have no answer. For the record, when I shot film, I have never run out of film either.</p>

<p>If you like small, mechanical/semi-mechanical manual-focus film SLRs, the FM/FE series are excellent. I spent 12 years shooting nothing but an FT3, FE and FE2. But if you are a photographer rather than collector, the FM2 and FE2 are far more cost-effective cameras. Why compete against collectors for the ridiculous prices for the FM3a?</p>

<p>"It can't be that it runs without batteries or in freezing temperatures."</p>

<p>You could try the test of taking the battery out of any digital SLR and see how many images you can snap. That would make the "working sans the battery" a bit easier to understand, maybe?</p>

<p> </p>

<p>So for arguments sake, the difference in price between a used FM2 and FE2 both... and an FM3a... will buy... how many sets of backup batteries?</p>

<p>The battery argument is, imho, just plain silly. I also have never run out of batteries where I didn't have a battery ready to go... ever... in over 25 years of shooting.</p>

<p>And since I started shooting digital, I've never even gotten down past half battery power! I just recharge at night.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>You could try the test of taking the battery out of any digital SLR and see how many images you can snap. That would make the "working sans the battery" a bit easier to understand, maybe?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I afraid not. Lots and lots of people have used DSLRs in the Arctic and Antarctic without any problems, certainly not with the battery. If anything, film becoming brittle in extreme cold is the bigger problem.</p>

<p>For those who want an FM3a, just becaue you want one is as good a reason as any, and there is nothing wrong with it, but coming up with bad excuses to justify the purchase is both silly and amusing.</p>