AF 85mm 1.4 D on FM3A ?

[gan_esh]

Hi all.

 

Thinking of getting a 85mm 1.4 afd for my FM3A (currently use 1.8).

Will it work flawlessly (manual focus of course) ?

 

Some have mentioned that the FM3A has problems with f1.4 lenses used

wide open?? Any comments from users of this body/lens combo?

 

Does the viewfinder get much brighter with the f1.4 aperture?

 

What is the manual focus feel of this lens like?

 

Any other problems I should know about?

 

Thanx in advance!

[steve_ql]

I don't have the FM3A, but I do use the 85 1.4 AFD on

an FM2N. It works fine.

 

No other lens can replicate the look at f/1.4; it's the

unique fingerprint of this lens.

If you don't need f/1.4 or don't

plan to use it wide open often, then the 1.8 you have is

perfectly fine.

[gan_esh]

Steve....

Do you use your camera/lens combo for studio portraits?

 

Some of my mates have told me that the 93 percent viewfinder coverage of Nikon FMs is limiting indoors. I have been doing fine these past few years, but just wondering if I'm handicapping myself.

I shoot portraits in 35mm and 645 exclusively.

 

Thanx!

[vgoklani]

why not just get the Manual focus version used, which is much cheaper than the AF (which

you can't use anyway). There are subtle variations between the 1.4 and 1.8 lenses - mainly

the Bokeh, but the 1.4 images are also slightly softer and more natural...

[steve_muntz]

The AF-D lens focus pretty well manually for an AF lens, but the AIS version may be better (can't be worse, but no personal experience). They're probably half the price for a nice used one, too.

 

There are a lot of reasons why you might want a bigger viewfinder, like the 100% on the "F" series (F3, F4, F5) but I usually shoot portraits on color neg film, and often they'll be printed 8x10 or some other size that will have some cropping. Actually, full frame prints like 4x6 can have a little bit of a crop to them as well. Because of this, the 93% might not be much of a problem.

[bruce_rubenstein___nyc]

A 100% coverage viewfinder does not mean a bigger viewfinder. Percent coverage and image magnification are two different things. A high magnification viewfinder has a larger image that often makes it easier to focus. The FM2n has a .86x magnification viewfinder compared to .75x of a F3hp. If you shoot negative film, use the full frame and don't print yourself a 100% viewfinder can create lots of unintentionally cropped prints. Sure, the top of someone's head is on the negative; try getting it printed. Very often a 93% viewfinder makes life a lot easier than remembering to frame a little loose.

[steve_ql]

If you shoot portraits with a 645 in a studio, you

should be very familiar with cropping prints.

I don't see how the less than 100% viewfinder can

be a problem if you do any cropping anyways.

 

Then again, why are you using 35mm film for portraits

in a studio when you already have the larger 120 film?

Your lighting and composition will have a much greater

impact on the final photograph than the use of an 85 1.4

over an 85 1.8.

[robert simpson]

Sounds like a match made in heaven.

[gan_esh]

I think I wasn't clear..... What I meant to say was some of my mates think the viewfinder in the FM3A is pretty small compared to other high-end 35mm slrs which makes it harder to focus indoors... I'm not really good with technical terms of a camera.

 

Heres my story.... I used to be a visiting photographer for a modelling agency in Singapore. Didn't really like the direction my photography was headed and stopped work a couple of years ago. But I still go back to visit the models and many of them want more 'honest' prints for the walls of their homes (seems to be all the rage in the modeling community these days)...which happens to be the style I am doing now. I also do a bit of solarization, line conversion and lithography.

 

I still use my 645 for large prints .... I shoot B&W portraits and I tend to use a tripod all the time, but I feel really stiff and detached with a tripod and 645. I believe the people photography is all about spontaneity, which is why 35mm seems to work for me. The print quality may not beat the 645, but most of my 35mm prints tend to look better artistically (to me and the models as well), and the extra grain I get from blowing up the small negative adds a little edginess to the final look. The girls feel more at ease when I use my 35mm and the overall vibe in the studio is more loose and friendly, which leads to better photos from my point of view.

 

This is the main reason I wanna get a better 85mm lens for my FM3A. I've used it before (a friend loaned me his f5 and 85mm afd 1.4 for a day) and think the results are the best I've seen from any 85-100 mm lens in 35mm format, Japanese and German!

 

Anyways, thanks for all your replies and KEEP THEM COMING!

[james_ogara1]

Gan the 1.4 AFD is a joy to use manually.

[chris_chow]

The AF 85/1.4 will work flawlessly on a FM3A/. But there is no noticeable improvment in the viewfinder as compared to the 1.8 version. May be this is limited by the size of the prism but I dont really know why.

 

Focus feel is less than silky but perfectly acceptable. Since it is an internal focus design, the feel is very light. Much easier to turn than the MF version.

 

The aperture ring is slightly loose. Other than that, the only complain is its size.

[steve_ql]

If that is the case, then get the 85 1.4 AFD. Keep the

included lens hood on at all times and any filters you have off.

 

I've done spontaneous available light baby portraits,

and the lens is easy to use handheld with its high speed.

[ravishankar]

I feel the Nikon 1.8AFD (which I use extensively for portraits) does a great job with lesser damage pricewise. The trick is to stop down by a few f stops to avoid an extremely shallow image unavoidable in this lens. This lens works fine with Fm3a, FA, F/N 65, and the Digital cousins.

RAVISHANKAR