Nikon lenses advice for FM3A

[maria_alvarez]

hi,

 

I am an amateur photographer that just got a FM3A Nikon camera with a 50mm

f/1.8 lens. I would like to get your advice on a basic set of lenses to start

with (Nikon or other brand).

 

I normally shot travel and family photos, without flash. I have been thinking

to buy a 24mm F/2.8 AIS and a zoom (maybe a 35 ? 135mm?). Your advice would be

highly appreciated.

 

PD my budget is about $500

 

cheers

[heartyfisher]

the classic list of lenses to use around the 50mm is usually either

 

20, 28, 50, 80-200, 400

 

or

 

24, 35, 50, 135

 

There is a very sharp 35-70F2.8 nikkor zoom but I would probably rather just use the 50mm

or you can get third party 28-75 f2.8 TAMRON thats got a very good reputation. or the sigma 24-70 f2.8

[leslie_cheung]

I would get the 75-150mm 3.5 E for tele and either the 24mm f2.8 or 28mm f2 for

wideangle. You get more FOV with the 24mm or more speed with the 28mm f2 depending

on your taste.

[anthony_valvo]

Nice camera. With $500, you should be able to pick-up some of the nice primes mentioned here. I'll just mention one more lens. Nikon made a 28-50MM f3.5. The lens was not in production long, but sometimes they come up on ebay. Although of limited range its small, fast and sharp. I pair this lens with my F3HP often.

[User_502260]

If you don't need something as wide as a 24 then a 28/3.5 AI is nice. It's very sharp and costs much less than the 28/2.8 AIS. To save some money you might even look for an older 24/2.8 which has been converted to AI. For $25-$35 you can also have a lens converted (www.aiconversions.com). A 35/2 is also a nice lens to have. I have an older non-AI Nikkor O which is still quite good even if it doesn't have the latest coating. Then I would look for a nice 105/2.5. Any 105/2.5 from a late Nikkor P with the larger rear element to the final AIS had the same optical design. The newer lenses have improved coating. Again, if there is a late P or a 'K' lens with AI conversion that would be fine. There are many 135 Nikkors around for not much money. Only the 135/2 and the later DC lens is expensive. A 135/3.5 AI is decently sharp and costs little. I have a 135/2.8 Nikkor QC which is very nice. Apart from being sharp it has very nice out of focus rendition (bokeh). Then I would look for a 200. I like the older and larger 200/4 models but I know that not everyone else does. You can get a 200/4 AI or AIS for a very good price from KEH. Finally I would consider a 55/3.5 Micro Nikkor of some kind. Many of the older ones have been converted to AI. Any model 55/3.5 from the Nikkor PC to the AI has good coating. These lenses are very sharp from up close to infinity and in good light you might even leave the 50/1.8 home when you have one of these. The later 55/2.8 is also very nice but will cost more and is prone to getting oil on its aperture blades.

 

Faster lenses will cost a lot more so you have to think about what kind of subjects you want to shoot and in what light. An outfit including 28/3.5 AI, 35/2, 55/3.5, 105/2.5, 135/3.5 and 200/4 AI/AIS will allow you to shoot a wide variety of subjects and it should be possible to put this together for $500 with a little effort. If 28 isn't wide enough for you then you can replace it with a 24. The important thing to remember is that you don't need the very latest lenses to get good results. What you need are lenses in good condition and in AI, AIS or converted mounts so they work in a convenient way with your camera.

[vincenzo_maielli]

I suggest you the Nikkor 24 mm f/ 2,8 and the Nikkor 105 mm f/ 2,5 (both great lenses).

Ciao.

[janvanlaethem]

For a basic set of lenses, I'd go for a 24mm f/2.8 and a 105mm f/2.5 to complement your 50mm. An aperture of f/2.8 will allow you to shoot brightly lit interiors without flash. Most zoom lenses have sliding apertures and it will be difficult to use them at the longest settings for flashless photography. Zooms with a constant f/2.8 aperture will be considerably more expensive.

 

If you search www.keh.com, they are currently selling a 24mm AI in excellent condition for 179 dollars and a 105mm f/2.5 AI in the same condition for the same amount. That still leaves you 142 dollars to spend on a nice 55mm Micro.

 

If you like macro photography and are willing to stretch your budget a little bit, you could substitute the 105mm f/2.5 for an AF 105mm Micro f/2.8. The AF Micro allows for a 1:1 magnification ratio, the manual focus 105mm Micro AI/AIS only gets to 1:2 and would need an optional extension ring to get you closer. The 105mm AF micro will be cheaper than the AF-D, with your FM3a you have no use for the distance chip anyway. It's also a nice lens for portraits.

[mark_amos]

I totally agree with the 24 2.8 and 105 2.5 choices. I have both. I also use the 75-150 E zoom on an FM3a, and it handles very well and is known to give very very good results, and can be had for $100 or even less. I actually compared results of the E zoom with my expensive 85 1.4 with both at 3.5 in a fairly well controlled test, and I could swear the zoom's images looked better. I also second the usefulness of the 200 f4 for the price. All these lenses suggested take 52mm filters. The only thing you are lacking with these lenses is real speed for available light interior shooting. Your 50 1.8 may do the job, but if you start wanting for more speed, the 50 1.4 is the best smallest economical answer. These classic Nikon manual lenses are great to use and offer results that need no apologies to any 35mm equipment out there.

 

I also add that it is so cool that Nikon was willing to produce the FM3a (about year 2001) before shifting the emphasis to digital. If digital had developed even a little faster, it might not have happened. The fact that you can get this camera less than 5 years old for reliability and then access the incredible range of Nikon lenses and accessories so cheap makes it a real tool. For fun I picked up an old MD12 motor drive for under $100. Its easy to go crazy with this stuff, but keep in mind you don't need to and by adding just the 24 and the 105, you can do just about anything you need to. Have fun.

[marek_fogiel]

You said "I normally shot travel and family photos, without flash."

 

For me, a 24/2.8 is perfect for cityscapes/interiors, and it has enough depth of field to be shot wide open at 1/30th of a second. (I actually use the Zeiss 25/2.8 ZF). As a second lens, I would take an 85/2, which is a bit more versatile than the 105, weighs less than the 1.4 versions, and has sufficiently shallow dof at f2 or f2.8 to isolate your portrait subjects. Longer lenses are more demanding in handling, shutter speed, focusing, etc, so if you don't really need them, better leave them aside. If you would need a top speed lens, I would vote for the Zeiss 50/1.4 ZF, but the equivalent Nikkor is not bad either.

[keith_leonin]

Agree with the others wrt 24/2.8 AIS and possibly the 105/2.5 AIS.

 

If you want a longer zoome, check out the 75-150mm Series E or the EXCELLENT 50-135mm/3.5.

[rick_helmke]

I picked up a 28/3.5, 85/2, 50/1.4, 35/2.8 and an 80-200/4.5, all Nikkors, all manual focus and all in super condition for under $300 total. Shop around a bit, watch ebay and places like KEH and you should be able to put a great package together for a similar amount. You might even consider a 2nd body as a backup. You can still come out under budget.

 

Rick H.