Nikon full manual system built to last forever

[antonio_leandro_nascimento]

I am trying to build a camera system that would work in almost

any condition, require no batteries and last many years. With these

characteristics in mind I started looking for bodies and lenses and

considered Nikon to be system to use, for it still produces a manual

camera (FM2) and has reasonable prices, but as I am a Canon user, I

do not know many of the Nikon world, so if you coud help me to choose

what to buy, considering the standarts specified below, I would

appreciate.

 

1- The Body.

 

The body needs to be rugged and simple. I have the FM2 in mind

(is there an FM3? What is the difference?). Any suggestions?

 

2- The Lenses.

 

I shoot nature (a lot) and people (specially when travelling). I

currently use a focal range from 35 to 300 mm, but I plan to expand

it, so I think I would need a 28mm and a 50mm primes and something to

cover the range between 28 and 300 mm, maybe a couple of zoom

lenses. I would like these lenses to be Nikon (or Nikkor? What is

the difference?) and I want to be manual focus. I know Nikon

produces lenses that can be used in manual and autofocus, but these

tend to have electrical contacts and motors, which are likely to

reduce the lifespan of a lens, so I want my lenses to be full manual

and have the less electronics as possible. Can anybody tell me which

lenses to use and the price range?

 

Thanks,

Antonio Leandro Nascimento

[todd peach seattle, washi]

FM2 is no longer being made; you might find some 'new old stock' out there. FM3 is the logical successor. In general, it covers the feature set of the FM2, but adds aperture priority automation and TTL flash metering. The information displayed in the viewfinder looks more like the old FE2, with a 'match needle' presentation during manual metering. The FM3 retains a full range of shutter speeds (but no automation) if your batteries die.

[Jerry_]

If you want a manual (long-lasting) Nikon body, try to find a Nikon F2.

There are several versions. The light meter on some models may not work, but the mechanical shutter will go without a battery.

[todd peach seattle, washi]

<b>Nikon vs. Nikkor</b>

<p>

For some obscure reason Nikon branded their original SLR lenses 'Nikkor'. When they decided to market a cheaper line of lenses in the early 80's, they called them 'Nikon Series E'. During that time, you could generally say that the 'Nikkor' lenses were more ruggedly built and had better lens coatings than the 'Nikon' lenses.

<p>

When Nikon started producing autofocus lenses (as far as I know) they dropped the confusing 'Nikkor' name and just call them 'Nikon' lenses. I'll point out that your concern about 'electronics and motors' in the AF lenses perhaps does not matter. Most (not the G series) AF lenses would work just fine on an FM3 or any Nikon MF body from the last 20 years even if the electronics were fried and the motor (most don't have them) were burned out.

<p>

<b>Lenses to consider</b>

<p>

As you'll often hear in these forums, lens choices are pretty 'personal', but I'll try to take a stab at fitting you out:<br>

<ul>

<li>28mm f/2.8 AIS - solid lens, well built good optics - $175-275</li>

<li>50mm f/1.4 AIS - everybody needs a little speed - $125-205</li>

<li>105mm f/2.5 AIS - great portrait lens, the one that made Nikon famous - $145-245</li>

<li>80-200mm f/4 AIS - good zoom for this range, moderately sized - $200-300</li>

<li>300mm f/4.5 ED IF AIS - excellent moderate speed 300 - $325-575</li>

</ul>

substitute (or add) a 55mm f/2.8 AIS micro for $235 or a 105mm f/2.8 AIS micro for $400 if you like macro work.

<p>

All the above prices are for used gear in the USA, priced at <a href='www.keh.com'>www.keh.com</a>. For prices in Brasil, I have no clue, nor do I know about issues of importing. Also, these aren't the choices I've personally made (I'm more of a 20/24/35/85 guy) but rather a 'direction' towards quality Nikon gear in response to your inputs.

[douglas_green1]

I'd like to comment on Todd Peach's response, by adding that AIS lenses offer ZERO advantages compared to AI lenses, except when used on a Nikon FA, which, given your needs, is NOT a body you'd desire, (a new FM3a, or a used FM2n or F3 or F2A are probably the ones you should seriously consider). The extra features of the AIS variant of the mount was never carried forward by Nikon into future autofocus bodies, and in fact, the AIS versions were often somewhat more cheaply constructed than earlier AI-mount lenses. But yet the AIS lenses are newer, and tend to sell for more money. So buying an excellent condition AI-lens for cheaper than the same lens in it's AIS version is an excellent way to save money.

 

On ebay, I'd say that the AI lenses tend to sell for 20-25% less than the same lenses in AIS mount in the same condition.

 

As for the bodies, the FM3a is the only one still in production that exactly meets your requirements. It is basically a combination of the features of the fully manual FM2n, and the auto-exposure FE-2 (both of which are superb cameras in their own rights, but the FE-2 needs batteries for almost all of it's shutter speeds).

 

As for used cameras, F3 bodies are very widely available, and other than the fact that, like the FE-2, it needs batteries to work, it is basically the most advanced manual focus pro system camera Nikon ever made. I believe that it was discontinued rather than feature updated simply to keep it from eating into F5 and F100 sales.

 

If you get an earlier F2-class camera, those are the most rugged, fully manual cameras made that are not battery dependent. I would get an F2A variant, for full aperture metering with AI and AIS lenses. The F2AS is even more advanced in the metering head, and uses LEDs, but it is not worth the huge price premium it commands vs. the F2A, in my personal opinion. The major downfall of the F2-class cameras compared to all of the others is how much bigger and heavier they are than the later bodies. Personally, I love the F3, and consider it to be the best-ever manual focus Nikon. But the F2, FM2n, FE-2, and FM3a all have their advocates as well for that title.

 

 

As for Focal lengths: Also consider Nikon's excellent 24mm f2.8 and one of the great Micro Nikkor lenses in the 55mm or 60mm range, as well as the legendary 105mm and 180mm lenses.

 

To me, a perfect set of Nikon prime lenses would be 24, 35, 55mm Micro, 105mm and the 180mm f2.8 ED Nikkor. Also, if you needed it, a longer zoom and a 28-80 zoom for times when you won't have a chance to change lenses. I also love super-wides, so I would add a 17mm or 18mm lens to my personal favorites, but these are specialty items, and I have found that the 17mm Tokina is a great bargain for 1/3 the cost of a Nikon/Nikkor lens in the same range.

[cd thacker]

Yours is one of those dream questions: build a lifelong system from the ground, up. Off hand, I can think of four different brands as possibilities: Contax, Pentax, Leica, and, of course, Nikon (others, such as Minolta and Olympus, I'm not at all familiar with).<P>

 

Contax (Yashica) makes manual focus bodies to pro specs; and the glass for them - Zeiss T* - is top-notch; second only to Leica. Expense here is high but not unreasonable. Worth looking into.<P>

 

I used Pentax as a kid (K1000), and can tell you from personal experience that their lenses are under-noticed; in some ways I preferred those lenses to my Nikkors. As far as I know, Pentax still makes manual focus bodies and lenses; and, certainly, there is a great deal of Pentax gear available on the used market at very low prices. Every once in a while, because of the combination of high quality and low price, I'm tempted to change over to Pentax. If there is a downside here, it would be the lack of system accessories, as well as, probably, less durability in the bodies than some others.<P>

 

If you have access to lots of cash, Leica may be the way to go. The build quality of many of their SLRs (especially the recent ones - R6.2, R8, and, very likely, the R9) is very high; and their lenses are unmatched in the format. You pay for that, however. And pay some more. Which effectively means that, if you go this way, you probably end up with a very minimal kit.<P>

 

All things considered - that is, choice of bodies and lenses, quality of construction, caliber of optics, system accessories, support, and price - Nikon is very likely the best way to go. You could choose their latest manual body, the FM3A see <a href=http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=003n9L>this</a> and <a href=http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=003qIW>this</a>, along with an assortment of brand new AIS lenses (which I'll ennumerate in a moment). Or, you could save considerably by turning to the used market, which is extensive.<P>

 

If you go used, I'd recommend any of the manual F series cameras: F, F2 (in any configuration - many voices call, alternately, the F and F2, "The best camera body ever made"), F3, F4 (though the F4 is battery-intensive, and so wouldn't meet you criteria). I'm especially fond of the F3 (having just acquired one), because of its size, weight, and recent vintage (they stopped making them just two years ago). Many people (those who aren't talking about the F and F2) regard the F3 as the pinacle of Nikon's SLR achievement. And they may be right.<P>

 

Just under the F series in terms of features and build quality, is the FM/FE series. Of these, the best bet is the hybrid FM3A mentioned above. I think this camera is the distillation of all the best characteristics of the FM/FE line. Nikon got it right. If you want to buy used, though, you can't go wrong with the FM2 or FE2 (though repairs for the FE2 are becoming increasingly problematic).<P>

 

Lens-wize, there are lots of choices. Personally, I prefer a kit that starts wide, and increases in increments that double, roughly, the focal length of each preceding lens; thus: 24mm, 50mm, 105mm, 180 or 200mm. Pretty standard stuff, but standard for a reason. <P>

 

In particular, I like the 24/2.8, 50/1.8, both AIS. For longer shooting, I have the 80-200/4.0 AIS zoom, which I like but seldom use. I haven't used the 105's, but I understand there is some color fringing with the 2.5 (versus the 2.8). E Series lenses have generally good-to-very-good optics, cheaper build quality, and are lower in price. A 2X teleconverter (TC-200 or TC-201) would be very useful with the longer lenses. For more info on Nikon lenses (which are properly called <U>Nikkor</U>), see <a href=http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=003nzZ>this thread</a>.<P>

 

I think the ideal <I>minimum</I> lifelong kit would consist of a 24mm, 50mm, 105mm. From there you could add an untra-wide, a PC (perspective control) lens, one or more micro (which is what Nikon calls macro) lenses (though a few close-up lenses would be cheaper - if you're not heavily into macro), one or more zooms, and so on, depending on your interests. The kit would include three identical bodies (two for use and one for backup). <P>For best results, you'll want to do what an acquaintance of mine is doing: he has, at last count, six F3's. He says he wants to acquire enough of them so that he'll be assured of having at least one working F3 for the rest of his life, as he has no intention of ever using anything else. For more info on Nikon bodies see <a href=http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=003oYl>here</a>.<P>

 

Thanks for the question. Maybe others can chime in with their own ideas. Let us know what you choose.

 

[cd thacker]

And obviously I wrote the above while everyone else was making their responses - all of which are interesting.

[todd peach seattle, washi]

<i>

I'd like to comment on Todd Peach's response, by adding that AIS lenses offer ZERO advantages compared to AI lenses, . . . and in fact, the AIS versions were often somewhat more cheaply constructed than earlier AI-mount lenses. But yet the AIS lenses are newer, and tend to sell for more money. So buying an excellent condition AI-lens for cheaper than the same lens in it's AIS version is an excellent way to save money. </i>

<p>

I can't argue much with Douglas' point here, though the difference in build quality between AI and AIS is pretty slim compared to the diffs between many AF and MF lenses. Having said that, I'll justify a couple of my AIS choices:

<ul>

<li>28 / 2.8 AIS - correct me if I'm wrong here, but the AIS added the important Close Range Correction (CRC) feature and in general improved the optical performance over it's AI variant</li>

<li>105 / 2.5 AIS - built-in hood. Some prefer the generous 'snap on' hood of the AI; I prefer this more compact setup.</li>

<li>300 / 4.5 AIS - Things get confusing in the 300 4.0-4.5 area, but I believe the AIS ED IF is the 'killer' lens. By contrast, I ran an older 'AI'd 300 4.5 'P Auto' for many years and found it just so-so.</li>

</ul>

My other choices I specified as AIS mostly so the listings would look consistent(!). I think you'll find fans of the earlier (smaller filtered) 80-200 in AI, and I haven't done much comparison of 50mm lenses.

[ellis_vener_photography]

Nikon F2T, preferably a version withthe plain, non meterered prism.

1.) 24mm f/2 AI-S<P>

2.) 35mm f/1.4 AI-S Nikkor<P>

3.) 50mm f/1.8 AI-S or 55mm f/2.8 AI-S Micro-Nikkor<P>

4.) 85mm f/2 AI-S Nikkor<P>

5.) 105mm f/2.5 AI-S Nikkor<P>

6.) 180mm f/2.8ED AI-S Nikkor<P>

7.) 300mm f/4.5 ED AI-S Nikkor<P>

8.) 400mm f/3.5EDIF Nikkor<P>

9.) TC-14B Teleconverter.

10.) 80-200mm f/2.8D AF Nikkor (not the AF-S version) This lens matches the

resolution of lenses 4 through 6 and could technically replace them but it is a

big heavy lens. It does have electrical contacts but there is no motor and I

don't think the embedded contactz will have any bearing on the durability or

functionality of the lens.<P> Havng listed all of that, i have to say that

professional photographers use and abuse their equiment a lot more than

you are likely to and find the current crop of high end Nikon bodies and optics

to be more than rugged enough.<P>But I wish you well in your quest, it is a

good time to buying up all manual equipment.

[craig_bridge]

The only Nikon body that meets your requirements and functions without battery (sans meter) for which spare parts are available is the FM3A. If I had to replace one of my ancient manual bodies today, it is a no brainer. You certainly don't want to be buying my ancient bodies that have taken 10K to 30K frames a piece.

 

The Nikkor branding is still in use on all but the lower end consumer lenses made by/for Nikon.

 

The AFD and AFS auto-focus lenses work well on my FE (and even pre-AI bodies like my ancient F with the addition of a meter coupling prong). The clutch pieces are the only parts not in the manual focus equivalent lenses whose failure will prevent its use on a manual focus body. I point this out because the newer Nikkor AF zooms, micro (macro), and super wide angle lenses are superior to their 30 year old equivalents (if they even existed). The extra AF parts do add to the weight and cost, but don't significantly affect the reliability on a pure manual body. You need to try out the manual focus rate on the newer Nikkor lenses. Don't assume that an AF lens will take less turning than a MF one. My ancient 50mm f/1.4 pre-AI has a bit more throw than my 50mm f/1.8 AFD but both have significantly more than the new 45mm lens being pushed with the FM3A.

 

Something else to consider is what happens to everyone's vision as we age and join the bifocal/reading glasses. There may come a point when you want or need AF technology. Having to replace many of your lenses at the same time is expensive.

[richard_cochran]

<cite>The only Nikon body that meets your requirements ... for which

spare parts are available is the FM3A.

</cite>

<p>

Are you saying spare parts aren't available for the FM2n? Or are

you saying the FM2n doesn't meet Antonio's requirements? Spare

parts ARE available for the FM2n, new and from Nikon -- production

of the FM2n was only recently discontinued. And I think the FM2n

meets the requirements that Antonio stated.

<p>

Spares are readily available for many of the older cameras,

too. Sometimes cannibalization may be required, but that's

possible and practical on mechanical cameras. A good repair

shop will be able to keep a clean F2 running for many more decades.

Actually, a well-treated clean F2 stands a good chance of

not needing to visit a repair shop for many decades to come.

<p>

Also, the FM10 might even meet Antonio's requirements, though I'd

personally have a problem calling it "rugged". I certainly

wouldn't recommend it, because I don't think it's built well

enough, but neither would I absolutely disqualify it outright,

and spares are available.

[andrew_somerset1]

A couple of quick comments:

Repair parts are still available for the FM2n. Cameras sold as new at the time of or shortly after the FM3a's release are still in warranty. There are lots of used ones on the market. This camera is still a great choice.

 

Nobody has mentioned the 75-150 Nikon Series E zoom, which is a great zoom lens and is inexpensive.

[douglas_green1]

And we even have the same 1st name. But I swear, I've never even met the guy!

[cd thacker]

I know. Funny thing. To read our responses, you'd think we discussed this beforehand over lunch or something. (By the way, how did you like that gazpacho?)

[joseph_verdesca]

I like the suggestion above - buy at least three of whatever body you end up choosing - the cumulative chance of breakage, droppage, theft, etc. of a camera (irrespective of how simple and reliable it may be) increases over time.

[patrick_davies1]

I have both FM2N and FM3. Both solid, very enjoyable cameras which (thankfully) both work without a battery. Don't overlook the Pentax, however.

 

AI vs. AIS: For manual bodies, save your money, buy AI.

 

Even at age 34, I can't imagine out-living any of this equipment.

[antonio_leandro_nascimento]

I would like to thank all of you who have answered my question. It is amazing to see the number and quality of answers, some of which seem to have been written by pro's in the art of chosing full manual cameras.

 

Many people commented on other manufacturers. I admire Leica, but it is far beyond my budget. I have used Yashica in the past, a FR1 body whose cloth shutter (it looks like satin) broke a few years ago and left me with a 50mm f/1.4 and a 28mm f/2.8 lenses that won't fit any camera I know. I am a great fan of Pentax, my first camera was a 110mm Pentax with interchangeable lenses which broke up a few years ago, but unfortunately it is hard to find Pentax gear in Brazil, so I think I will use Nikon in order to have easy access to spare parts and accessories.

 

So far I am considering to buy a FM3 body, a 24mm f/2.8 and a 50mm f/1.8 (or 1.4 I don't know yet)and the famous 105mm lens. For the other focal lenses I am in doubt. Most of you have suggested primes of various focal lenghts. I know that primes are better than zooms in many conditions, but nature photography is a very important part of my work, and it means carrying the equipment up and down in trails in my backpack so I need my system to be light. Of course I will use primes in my most important focal lenghts, 24mm (and/or 28mm), 50mm, 105mm and 300mm, but I would appreciate something to cover the intermidiate lenghts, something like 28-80 (or 28-105mm) and 80-300mm (or anything like this). Any suggestions?

 

Thanks,

Antonio Leandro Nascimento

[patrick_davies1]

Regarding focal lengths, the 300mm F4.5 is big and heavy. The 200mm F4 is pretty compact, so is the 135mm F2.8. There's a 135mm F2 and a 180mm F2.8, but they are significantly larger and heavier than the 1.8 135mm and the 4.0 200mm.

[todd peach seattle, washi]

<i>

So far I am considering to buy a FM3 body, a 24mm f/2.8 and a 50mm f/1.8 (or 1.4 I don't know yet)and the famous 105mm lens. For the

other focal lenses I am in doubt. Most of you have suggested primes of various focal lenghts. I know that primes are better than zooms in many

conditions, but nature photography is a very important part of my work, and it means carrying the equipment up and down in trails in my

backpack so I need my system to be light. Of course I will use primes in my most important focal lenghts, 24mm (and/or 28mm), 50mm,

105mm and 300mm, but I would appreciate something to cover the intermidiate lenghts, something like 28-80 (or 28-105mm) and 80-300mm

</i>

<p>

To some extent, 'primes' and MF go together. The 'golden age of zoom lens design' mostly happened after manufacturers stopped designing MF glass. There's a few happy exceptions (75-150 f/3.5 Nikon E comes to mind), but if you're looking for excellent zoom lenses, you should perhaps open your 'search criteria' up a little to include AF lenses. <p>

I might recommend the Nikon 35-70 f/2.8 AF (D or not) and the Nikon 80-200 f/2.8 AFD (latest non-S version, w/ tripod collar) as two very solid performers. Excellent optics, built well, nothing I'm aware of internally that is likely to fail and render the lens unusable on an FM3. Others might step in and render opinions on their favorite xx-300mm zoom, but I think the 80-200 f/2.8 with a good 1.4x (I use the Kenko Pro myself with very good results) is as good as any other xx-300mm zoom I've seen.

[maria_s.]

For any info on any lenses ever built by Nikon check those sites:

 

http://home.aut.ac.nz/staff/rvink/nikon3.htmlhttp://www.mir.com.my/rb/http://www.nikonlinks.com/unklbil/Nomenclature.htm

photography/hardwares/nikonfmount/lens1.htm

[rolf_lockwood]

Big question, but fun. First the body: my choice would an F2A, as others have suggested, with an F3HP next in line. They're both tanks, the F2 more so, but the best thing about them is 100% viewfinder coverage, among other features. That matters to me, perhaps not to you, and it's why I rule out the FM/FE/FM2/FE2/FM3A family. I wear glasses, and while I truly love my little FE, it's annoying to have to move my head around -- or the camera -- to see the whole frame. I use it when size/weight is an issue.

 

Don't worry too much about spare parts, though Brazil may present a problem in that regard. Even old F Photomic FTn meter heads can be repaired, usually by easy cannibalizing. But with the metering exception, they don't break. I would actually go so far as to recommend you consider a Nikkormat FT3 -- modern AI lens indexing, mirror lockup for your 300 on a tripod, and truly built like a tank. Often more expensive than an F or maybe even an F2 to buy, which indicates how good they are in some people's eyes. I have an ancient Nikomat FTn which is still going strong after 30 years. Have never touched it internally except to have it cleaned. Nikkormats (or Nikomats, the Japanese domestic name) feel better in my hands than any other Nikon, for what it's worth. The only downside I can see is a slightly dimmer screen than more modern cameras.

 

As to lenses, how about a 50 1.4 AI, a 28 2.8 AIS (better than the AI, by all accounts) or an AI/AIS 24 2.8. Get the 28 2.0 AI or AIS if you can afford it. Then a 105 or 135 (the latter much under-rated). And if you really want a zoom to bridge the gap to 300, Nikon actually made a 50-300 AI 4.5 with ED glass. Huge and likely pricey (check www.keh.com). The suggestion to use an AF 80-200 2.8 with a 1.4x converter is good, and you shouldn't ignore those high-quality AF lenses. They're pretty robust at that price level. Another option, still AF, is the Tokina 100-300 4.0, apparently not a bad lens for the money (US$550 or so used at KEH right now). I think Sigma makes one too, but the upper-level Tokina lenses are built much, much better in my experience. Another decent combo, non-AF, would be a Nikkor 80-200 AIS 4.0 zoom ($250 or so?) plus a Nikkor 300 AIS 4.5 EDIF ($500 or so, I think). That 300 is a great lens, I believe, though I've never used one. I have had the 80-200 4.0 and it's OK, though the AF 2.8 is better.

 

That covers it, though of course it's all just my opinion. Remember that not all Nikon glass is excellent. There are some dogs in there, and a few great lenses amongst the independent makers.

 

Have fun!

[david_h._hartman]

For lens evaluations from a critical evaluator try <a

href="http://www.naturfotograf.com/" target="_new">Bjørn Rørslett</a><br>

<br>

For information on lens models, serial numbers, id photos, etc. <a

href="http://home.aut.ac.nz/staff/rvink/nikon3.html" target="_new">Roland Vink</a>

<br>

<br>

For camera bodies the Nikon F2As and Nikkormat FT3 have silicone

blue cell meters and are preferred to earlier models that had Cds

cell. The FM2n and FE2 are fine cameras, the FM3a should be. To

see the whole finder with the FM/FE family and glasses just wear

Flexon® brand frames and smash em into your face.<br>

<br>

Top Picks: 20/2.8 AIS, 20/3.5 AIS, 24/2.8 AI/AIS, 50/1.8AI/AIS,

55/3.5 non-AI Micro (early), 55/2.8 AIS Micro, AF 60/2.8(D)

Micro, 85/1.4 AIS, 85/2.0 AIS (late), 105/2.5 AI/AIS (the lens

that fell down from Jupiter), 180/2.8 ED AI/AIS (wonderful wide-open

to f/5.6, good with PN-11, PK-13), 300/4.5 EDIF (1m free working

distance on PN-11 and PK-13).<br>

<br>

The humble little 135/3.5 AIS hasnt got the reputation of

the 105/2.5 but I was surprised at the fine performance it gave

in night photography. I dont know why I sold it.<br>

<br>

Zooms to consider: 25~50/4.0 AIS, 75~150/3.5 E Series (mid and

late version), AF 35~70/2.8(D), 80~200/4.0 AIS (not easy to focus

quickly due to 270° focus throw, focuses to 1.2m, good with T5

and T6), AF 80~200/2.8D ED (big, heavy, sharp).<br>

<br>

Lenses I recommend against: 35/2.0 (early) uneven illumination

and edge sharpness, 50/1.4 AI, just soft compared to 50/1.8, the

late compact 50/1.4 AIS and AF are reportedly top performers, 85/2.0

(early) didnt care for small size, 105/1.8 AIS, I special

ordered one of these and it compared poorly to three 105/2.5(s)

and one 105/2.8 Micro-Nikkor. The 105/1.8 was soft and had low

contrast wide open. This was apparent in the viewfinder prompting

careful tests. Three of the other lenses clearly beat the fast

105 from f/2.5 or f/2.8 through f/5.6 but by f/8.0 all five were

equal. <br>

<br>

Lenses Id like to get: 28/2.0 AIS, 35/1.4 AIS, 50/2.0 AI,

105/4.0 AI Micro, 200/4.0 AIS (compact version).<br>

<br>

Have fun!