Wouldn't you love to see a digital version of the FM family?

[breogan_gomez]

<p>I know Nikon won't release this pretty soon, probably never!!

 

<p>Wouldn't it be nice to have a fully manual camera, small, with the ability to

meter with AIS lens? Something in the Leica M8 fashion but more affordable. I

know this type of body will only please weekend aficionados and may be some pros.

 

<p>I love my D40x, It's a very nice camera, but taking pictures with my FM2

takes a whole a different aproach which forces you to think about what it really

matters: speed, aperture and composition.

 

<p>Leica M8 proves that there is an interest for this type of bodys. May be not

much to justify Nikon to release a body like this, I don't kown.

 

<p>What do you think?

[ronald_moravec1]

That is why Nikon has the M on the dial on top. Stands for manual. If you don`t tell it what to do, the camera does not do it. Sunny 16 still works with digital

 

Or you can turn it to P (perfect) and let the camera make the mistakes. It can make them faster than you so you get a second try.

 

There is no going back to brass and chrome and rolls of celluloid coated with silver.

[breogan_gomez]

<p>"There is no going back to brass and chrome and rolls of celluloid coated with silver."

 

<p>Why have you been so honest? :-P

 

<p>Seriously, I know there is no going back to that old days and, personaly, I don't care. My complains relate to the fact that there is no lightweight body that can metter with manual lens. And AF lens, which you can use manualy, doesn't feel so nice. And manual focusing with the green dot it's a bit unconfortable.

 

<p>I guess I am asking for an stripped down D200, with a smaller and ligther body. But this relates more with an affordable price that with "old days" coming back.

 

<p>And yes, manual focus is slower, but I like it. :D

[Peter_in_PA]

I think it would be a digital FE2... but I'd love to see it, too.

[jim_e.]

I'm right there with you Breogan. A digital S3, yeah, that would be nice too. You know, when the Leica M8 came out I was tempted. I had a D2X and a few lenses I could have sold but I resisted. Mainly because I always seem to drift back to Nikon and I just couldn't take the plunge. I almost did though. Some people just don't get it. Its the feel you get. If someone let me use their M8, I don't know, might be enough...

[walterh]

Not really - I would prefer a modern version of the F2 over the hulk of on FM^^.

 

Actually it does not really make sense to use a digital F2 or FM until we get a full frame sensor. Only then we will have the same large and bright viewfinder we used to have in the old days when it was possible to manually focus a lens at f1.4 at the required precision.

 

Alternatively a larger (than the sensor) mirror and viewfinder might be a nice feature because one could have framelines for the 1.5 crop factor of todays sensors within the larger view of the FF size. This would gives us a "rangefinder feeling" for composition. But this would clearly be too innovative for Nikon- hrr :-P.

 

A good compromise would be a digital version (with FF sensor of course) of the F100. Reasonable MF capability and OK at AF.

[wj_lee]

There were rumours about FM3D while ago, but that seem to have died out.

 

Leica has M8, and would love to see FM3D or equivalent.

[greg jansen]

I would get one in a minute. Somthing totally simple, small, less buttons, options and menus. Manual focus. It would be nice if it had a removable motor drive. Just like the FM. For me the FM is like the Leica M of the SLR world.

[walterh]

"It would be nice if it had a removable motor drive. "

 

To move the bits and bytes?

[Ed_Ingold]

Fully manual cameras don't meter, and digital cameras ALWAYS need batteries. You can use AIS lenses and meter with the D200 and any of the D1 or D2 professional DSLRs.

 

If you prefer a small frame without a grip lug, there's always the Leica M8, Digilux and (now extinct) Epson R1.

[mark_amos]

Breogan, I totally commiserate. Although I much prefer the feel of an FM series to the D40, I would say that if Nikon would add metering capabilites for ai lenses to the D40 as a D40ai or whatever, we could at least feel they understand the variety of needs of their customers (SMALL versatile body) and had accommodated it within their chosen modern body line. I can't believe this would be that difficult, and as a small modification to the D40, I don't see a lot of risk of loss of money especially if they made them in small numbers. In order not to infringe on the D200 market, they could keep it with consumer level build quality, and still charge more than the current D40. It would bring new buyers like me as I don't see a D200 as a substitute.

 

..and for goodness sake, they still sell the manual focus lenses new and show them on their website, so why not offer more body options for these lenses?

[jose_angel]

The only benefit IMO could be size and weight. But the main need of batteries would discard the benefits of the FM.

 

They (Nikon people) can do something better on whatever the DSLR adding non-CPU lens databases, as in the F6 and D2X. It would help to save battery and will reduce weight.

 

Think on a D40X with a say, 20 non-CPU lens user friendly database. Who will need a digital FM? How many people would buy this camera?

 

(Add a full-format sensor and IMO it would be the worlds best seller camera ever...)

[douglas_green1]

Here's what I did: I bought an Olympus E-300 - They currently sell for well under $300 for the bodies. I replaced the focusing screen with a Katz Eye split image center with a microprism collar - another $150 so that's a total of $450 for an 8 MP body that comparable in features and performance to a D70, but with 2 exceptions: 1st off, it will meter (at the shooting aperture) with any manual lens, and it will work in both metered manual and Aperture Priority mode. And because of the 4/3 system's short flange to focal plane distance, it easily adapts to nearly all manual focus lens mounts (the most notable exception - no Canon FD support). I then bought several Nikon F to 4/3 lensmount adapters on ebay (as well as some Pentax M42 to 4/3 adapters, and a Leica R to 4/3 adapter). These adapters sell for around $20-25 each on ebay. Ergonomically, in practice, this camera when using manual focus lenses, works VERY much like an 8 MP digital FE or FE2.

 

The biggest issue is the 4/3 system's 2X crop factor, so basically, wide angle lenses are useless as such. But it's GREAT for using telephotos, and normal lenses, and macro lenses. In practice, I use this camera with the following manual focus lenses: a 28mm f2.8, a 50mm f1.8 (makes a GREAT portrait lens) a 90mm f2.5 Tamron SP Macro lens, my 180mm f2.8, and my 300mm f2.8 ED Nikkors (with or without a 1.4x or 2X converter), and my Tokina 100-300mm f4 ATX zoom lens.

 

Here are a few sample shots: The airshow photos used the Tokina 100-300 ATX zoom, and the bird shots used my 300mm f2.8 ED Nikkor (with a 2X teleconverter for the hummingbird).

 

http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m288/dougjgreen/Miramar%20Air%20Show/MAS-6-small.jpg

 

http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m288/dougjgreen/Miramar%20Air%20Show/MAS-5-BA-small.jpg

 

http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m288/dougjgreen/birds/Humbird1.jpg

 

http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m288/dougjgreen/birds/Eagle1-small.jpg

 

I also use it with Olympus' superb 11-22mm zoom, to solve the wide angle problem, and their 40-150mm telephoto when I need autofocus.

 

In point of fact, not just Olympus Digital bodies can be used with Nikkor MF glass, Canon DSLRs can as well. But the Olympus' bodies are presently less expensive and I prefer their ergonomics to the lower cost Canons. In essence, my Olympus E-300 with the Katz-Eye screen has become my dedicated 8 MP digital back for use with my AI and AIS glass. And nowadays, you can get one, with a Katz-Eye screen, for around $400.

[russ_butner___portland__or]

"P" stands for Program? Gee, I always considered it the "P"rofessional mode :-)

 

Russ

[jerry_kirkwood]

As long as someone mentioned the Olympus: Rebel XTi + adaptor will meter (stop down style) manual focus Nikkors, has "only" 1.6x crop vs 2x.

[hugo_vincent]

I hope Nikon does eventually release a full-frame digital body in the style of the old FE/FM series. I want a simple, robust, rugged, and compact metal bodied camera, that can use the more compact manual focus lenses.

 

I don't know why all Nikon's (and Canon's etc.) pro bodies(including the D200) are so large. And the "grip" shape is not necessary for everyone either. Many users want a small body that is built and functions to a professional standard. If some features (like auto-focus) have to go to make it small enough, so be it. I think the surprising success so far of the Leica M8 demonstrates this.

[breogan_gomez]

Exactly Hugo, thats what I meant: a small, robust, full frame body. Sure It will need bateries, but only for the sensor and the shutter.

 

I guess pros world has evolve a lot since the 30's, but should be room for a small, proffesional, lightweight body.

[joseph_wisniewski]

"My complains relate to the fact that there is no lightweight body that can metter with manual lens."

 

Canon rebel with a Nikon adapter, and a Katz Eye split image screen.

[douglas_green1]

Or, Olympus E-300, E-330, E-400, E-500, or E-1, with a Katz-Eye screen and Nikon to 4/3 lensmount adapter.

[hugo_vincent]

Both the Canon and Olympus bodies with adapters can only stop-down meter, which often isn't that useful. And neither is a robust (metal), professional body, nor particularly compact or nicely styled. I still think there is a need for a digital Nikon FM3D or whatever they call it.

[douglas_green1]

In practice, I have found the stop-down metering to be a non-problem in real life - especially when shooting in Aperture Priority mode. It REALLY is not an issue when actually doing it. The fact is, the manual focus lenses I generally use on the camera are pretty darn fast (usually noticeably faster than the kit digital lenses that the camera is designed for) and I either tend to use them near the maximum aperture, or else, when I am NOT using them nearly wide open, I generally care quite a bit about depth of field, and it's quite convenient to focus, stop down, and shoot, with the stopping down step basically serving to check depth of field as well as getting a meter reading.

 

It is surprisingly convenient when one actually does it - And when looking through lenses which are f2 or f2.8, the finder is astonishingly bright when compared to kit lenses that are more typically in the f4 to f5.6 range.

[douglas_green1]

And actually, the E-300 IS an extremely rugged metal cast body, and it's quite compact. Many folks think it's styling is ugly, but ergonomically, it's an absolute swan. IMHO, when a Katz-Eye screen is installed, it's VERY comparable ergonomically to an FE-2 (which is, IMHO, the BEST Nikon ever ergonomically) when each are used in Aperture priority mode with Manual Focus glass.

[janvanlaethem]

Breogan,

 

If the price was right, I'd buy one on the spot. Nothing compares to the FM or FE series for size, weight and ergonomics. All you really need for intuitive control are a shutter speed dial on top of the camera body, aperture control (preferably on the lens barrel), a depth-of-field control button and a bright viewfinder.

 

It looks like the market is not big enough for Nikon to seriously consider this, but you never know. Anyway, this subject has been discussed before. You may find the following links useful:

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00HR5A

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00JjQT

 

regards

 

Jan

[lee_carruthers]

This is great to see so many agreeing on this. I think it's pathetic that all the so-called "pro" cameras (and lenses) these days are huge, ungainly devices. I've owned a Canon 1Ds and still have a 5D, but really prefer to shoot with my little Rebel XTi, except for the lousy viewfinder and cheesey quality. And yes, I have large hands.

 

I love digital for the workflow and ease of travel, but long for my old small (film) cameras and lenses.

 

Give me an FM2n-sized, full-frame digital with small, manual focus lenses, a bright viewfinder and professional quality. I don't need 40,000 options and 30 buttons to push.

 

I'd bet that someone could make money building a pro camera for such a niche. If I had the $$, I'd do it myself.

[hugo_vincent]

"I'd bet that someone could make money building a pro camera for such a niche. If I had the $$, I'd do it myself."

 

Actually, I'm so keen on the idea of a digital FE2 or FM3a that I've actually been toying with the idea of making one for myself...

 

I've found a source for full-frame 14 megapixel sensors, and admittedly they're not very sensitive nor do have very good noise performance. (For the record, it's the same sensor that Kodak used in the SLR/n and SLR/c a few years ago and costs about US$2000 in low quantities. There is also a monochrome version thats a few hundred dollars less). They will probably exhibit some degree of vignetting with wide lenses as well.

 

Besides the sensor, the rest of the electronics are fairly easy these days: one of the Analog Devices all-in-one CCD digitizing chips, a Maxim all-in-one camera power supply chip, an FPGA, some SDRAM for a buffer, and an SD card slot.

 

At this stage, I don't think it can be done within the space confines of an existing FE2 or FM3a body - there isn't enough thickness around the pressure plate to fit a the sensor - I think a new back would need to be fabricated, and parts of the film rails would need to be milled out (I haven't yet worked out if that would foul the shutter mechanism either). The whole thing would end up be 3-5mm thicker than an FM/FE series body. There would also be other modifications to the body like wiring the electronics into the cameras original metering and shutter electronics.

 

In all, I think you could manufacture in small quantities them for a cost price of around US$3000-4000 including labour, assuming you'd start with an off-the-shelf FE2 or FM3a body. (Pity Nikon discontinued the FM3a...)

 

For my own DIY purposes, I think I'd just put in a fairly low-resolution B&W LCD, just enough for a histogram and status reporting (number of shots left on the card, battery level etc). i.e. no image review, just to keep everything as simple as possible. I think this display would be behind a hinged back (like a film FE/FM body), with a cut-out so you could see vital info without opening the back. The SD and battery sockets would also be behind the back. I also think it would record RAW only (no JPEG), again to keep things simple. Obviously a retail non-DIY version couldn't really get away with these limitations.

 

So as a DIY project, it's going to still be some time off before I'm ready to start building, and I'd rather Nikon just did all the hard work for me :-)