arthur_smith1

<p>I love them all. Variety is the spice of life. I doubt there is a shutter issue. if there is, a few shoots might very well be what the FM needs. </p>

<p>Yes, I would say at all apertures. I am going to take Craig's advise and compare the meters, and also, try to use Pocket Light Meter on my iPhone to meter half a roll, and see what I get. </p>

<p>I have noticed the overexposure through the scanning process. And I do not notice overexposure on my F2, F3, FE2, F FtN, N80, or N65. </p>

<p>I dont think its development- I have noticed on both TriX and TMax 100. and, my F3 exposes those perfectly. Different lenses also have produced overexposure. Meters can go out of whack- after all, we are talking circuitry that is over 30 years old. </p>

<p>It makes perfect sense to me. if the camera's meter is overexposing, a faster shutter speed may be called for. I may also try try shooting at 400, and going with the meter's underexposure indication. Yes, I would like to use shallow DOF on occasion. And I am familiar with Sunny 16, but it is not the end-all. </p>

<p>I have an F2S, and many other Nikon F bodies. To me, digital never "replaced" film. Nor was it ever an "either/or" proposition. Different tools for different purposes. And yes, I do shoot digitally as well, with a D300. Very much a love/hate relationship with it. But the F2? Pure love. </p>

<p>So, I have shot a couple of rolls with my newly acquired FM. After developing a couple of rolls, the shots seem to generally be over exposed by a stop. I have a roll of TriX in there now, and have my ASA set to 800. For times when I don't want all that speed, like outdoors with a wide angle or normal lens, does it make sense to reduce the light coming in with an ND filter? If so, which filter specs should I use? Thanks, Arthur</p>

<p>I cannot imagine having any sentimentality towards a DSLR body. None, </p>

<p>Portra 400 is a very finely grained film that scans beautifully. I saw another poster comparing the grain versus digital at the same ISO, and saying it will show more- which is really irrelevant to the discussion. If the lab did the scan, chances are it was done at a lower resolution. While it is true that underexposed images will show more grain on the scan, you'd be amazed at what you can do with a basic film scanner, such as an Epson V500. In every case, my results have exceeded what the lab does. </p>

<p>PS- I disagree with the suggestion of putting it in a plastic bag with desiccant. White it is an electromechanical camera, there are oils and lubricants that will indeed dry up over time, faster when stored this way. I would say that if you store it in your bag, and fire it occasionally, you should be fine. Really no need to overengineer a solution here.</p>

<p>Forgive me if this sounds rude, but, "store" a D300? DSLR bodies, even the most expensive ones, will not become collectible, like an F, F2, F3, FE/2, etc. I'd say just shoot it until it shoots no more. It will not be a sought after shelf display piece, neither will any DSLR. <br> In my eye, Nikon DSLR's really have not changed in appearance in years- they all look the same. If you want to collect, start buying some of their vintage film bodies. I love them.</p>

<p>If a touch screen starts a trend more intuitive user interfaces, and the reduction of the cavalcades of menu madness in DSLR's, this could be a great start. </p>

<p>Really overpriced for what essentially is a slow aperture zoom with mostly plastic construction. VR, or VRII, does not replace a fast aperture. Nothing does. </p>

<p>The # of actuations has very little bearing on anything. Many online seem to think as though once a camera reaches exactly 100K, or 150K clicks, that it is going to self destruct Mission Impossible style. Reality is that you should just shoot with a camera, and not worry about such things. They are made to be used. The camera could fail well before, or well after, the stated number. </p>

<p>I think this is one of the pitfalls of working with zooms, afraid to say. </p>

<p>The "problem" with a 50 for portraiture is not its sharpness. Modern day digital photographers put much too importance into sharpness. There is a lot more to a lens than that. The big problem is the focal length of a 50 on an FX body. It is a "normal", and will not provide the flattering perspective that an 85, 105, or 135 will provide. They are also sharp lenses. </p>

<p>They make reference to it, but really give you very little to no guidance as to how to use it. It is designed more for prime lenses than for zooms, which I would not use it for.</p>

<p>I love the 35mm focal length. The Nikkor 35mm f/2.8 AI is one of my alltime favorite lenses. To me, a 50 was always "too close", and often I ask myself "why do they call this a normal lens"? I think the 35 is not too wide, not too close. Just right! </p>

<p>Really a function designed for prime lenses, not zooms. </p>

<p>Out of the F Photomic FTN, F2S, F3HP, and FE2, I have found the Nikkormat FT3 metering the best of all, followed closely by the FE2. Once again, mileage may vary.</p>

<p>I may try this. But like everything with these vintage classics, your mileage may vary! </p>

<p>I think it is one of the most accurate light meters I have ever used. It just seems to consistently nail exposure. By contrast, my D300 with its supposed state of the art matrix light metering, seems to always overexpose, blow highlights, and want to shoot hot. Sometimes less is more. </p>

<p>It is an amazingly accurate light meter. Sunny 16 has little appeal to me- no shame in using a light meter in my opinion, even if it is on my iPhone. But I do also have a Gossen Luna Pro F. TTL metering does really work beautifully, though. <br> But that meter bounce was jarring at first. I have never experienced it on my F Photomic FTN, or FE-2, both with manual needles. <br> Apparently there is a resistor in the FT3 circuit that can build up carbon, etc. </p>

<p>So, I took the FT3, a replacement one that KEH sent me, for a spin this weekend. When I first powered on the light meter, the dreaded jumpy needle phenomenon showed up. I then decided to use some intuitiveness, and work the shutter speed dial back and forth for a few minutes. To my amazement, this really seemed to settle the needle down, and the results proved an amazingly accurate metering system.<br> Should I be concerned with this showing up again? I have already exchanged it here once, and while KEH is great to do business with, not sure I want to keep shipping these things back. Yes, they have that 6 month warranty, but they typically do not service your purchase, they simply replace it with what could end up as another "crap shoot". </p> <p>A</p>

<p>Had a few problems with the chrome model KEH shipped. The back would not stay closed, and it would pop open randomly, fogging a frame. The viewfinder was loaded with dust. And, it would not focus to infinity with the 50 f/1.4 that focused fine on other bodies.<br> They replaced it with a black model. Taking it out for a spin this weekend! </p>