mdma

<p>So the general consensus seems to be the that the FM3a at £210 seems to be quite a deal, and is more modern and feature packed than the FE2.<br>

I got my FE2 at £100 body only in June and I feel I paid over the odds somewhat, so yes you can do slightly better than £150 for both lens and body. John Tran mentioned the condition was important to ascertain and this is very true for older cameras...<br>

...This brings me onto my F-801s. I got it early October (2010) in near-mint boxed condition with the MF-21 control back (also boxed and near-mint). Total price = £29.99. It is a joy to use and I cannot think of a better <em>Introduction </em>to Nikon 35mm photography, though its modern looks and noisy, "dentist drill" motors may put some people off. And because it's been so lightly used, Im hoping the electronics still think its 1988 (at least the MF-21 does!) and wont bring about any problems for a long long time, which as pointed out earlier pretty much means end of the line for this era of AF Nikon.<br>

Finally the F5 was also mentioned. I bought mine for £180, which came with a second battery holder, and cosmetically it looked as if the past user had shot enough film to need it on a daily basis, but I dont care. The single digit F series are the jewels in Nikon's crown, and collectively are some of the best 35mm cameras ever made - it would be the last camera I would let go.<br>

SS</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I just want to finish my last days in a war zone with a film camera. I hope the winning shot can be developed by whoever finds it. :-)</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Im with Larry on this one. I think Robert Capa had the right idea :P</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I did the same thing in 2003. I bought a Nikon D100, got bored with the amount of computer time involved then went back to film. I now have about thirty film cameras so I don't need the D100 for backup!</p>

</blockquote>

<p>This sounds like me in a few years. Case in point: The day after I bought after my D3100 I got a F801s with the MF21 back...</p>

<p>Great photos! I hope your son enjoyed himself, is he into photography too?<br>

Coincidently Im going to London in 2 weeks, also equipped with Fujicolor C200 that Jessops seem to be handing out like sweets.<br>

I was torn as to whether to put it in my recently acquired F801s or stalwart OM-1n. Probably to the disappointment of some here Ill most likely take the Nikon, but my Oly says hi :)</p><div></div>

<p>Yep thats what I mean - you can adjust saturation and sharpness for each of the picture control presets.<br>

Out of the factory, the sharpness is 3 of a possible 9- Im happier with a 7/8 - but I appreciate all the factors you mentioned do affect it as well. </p>

<p>Oh all were taken with the 18-55 VR. </p>

<p>Sample Image 4 - </p><div></div>

<p>Sample Image 3 - Sharpened in Post</p><div></div>

<p>Sample Image 2 - Default Sharpness (look at "Minerva")</p><div></div>

 

<p>Just some brief pro/cons I've noticed.<br>

A little about where I'm coming from– Amateur who started taking photography seriously this January, have built up a small collection of film SLRs. The two I use most are my F5 and my OM-1n - Yeah I like my pro bodies :)<br>

The D3100 is my first DSLR.<br>

<strong>Things I like:</strong> <br>

Its small. Really small. The footprint is little larger than a CD case, and around 9-10cm tall. Great for travel.<br>

Its light too, so much so that the D3100 can be easily held in one hand for extended periods of time.<br>

But by no means does the D3100 feel cheaply made; the body does not creak or groan at all. If I had to be nitpicky, the shutter mode selection switch (single/multiple/self timer etc.) sounds hollow but that’s it. All the other buttons have pleasant resistance in a pleasant matt finish (with the exception of the chrome shutter release – just a little tacky, no?) The battery compartment is snug; the memory card slot cover springs open with a sense of bravado, and the live view lever in feels particularly well made, as if physically connected to the mirror system.<br>

As far as actual operation goes, it’s made simple as could be really with the D3100 illustrating nearly every change with a sample picture.<br>

It accepts the latest generation of SDXC cards, if 64GB+ of data is your thing.<br>

Video quality (1080p) is solid but not spectacular. It certainly wont be used for shooting an episode of House, put it that way.<br>

The viewfinder is small but perfectly useable, even for a glasses wearer like myself.<br>

The built in flash has iTTL and the usual sync settings – slow, red eye, rear curtain – and output compensation. Once learned and understood, It’s adequate for a casual shooter.<br>

In terms of image quality, all I can say is that Im happy with performance up to and including ISO 3200. Getting quality pictures at 6400 is just wishful thinking!<br>

<strong>Things I don’t like:</strong><br>

I’m surprised at the lack of AEB – how hard would it have been to implement, seriously? Even my lowly EOS 300 film body has it. I suppose with the advent of RAW and Photoshop et al it’s not as much as an issue, and the target audience is unlikely to use it, but still...<br>

The passable video is hampered with mono audio (only - no inputs). The autofocus does indeed work during recording, but is audible and unsuccessfully hunts for poorly lit subjects:<br>

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NHzvJPG12tU<br>

The screen is only 230k instead of 920k seen elsewhere. Although this just reflects the D3100's standing in the Nikon stable, one would think a hi-res screen would help attract casual users during a a demonstation, and sharing parts across the range would surely keep the extra cost to a minimum.<br>

The default sharpness is way,<em>way</em> too low.<br>

<strong>Summary:</strong><br>

If Reuters called me tomorrow and offerred me the chance to do some shooting on the other side of the world, I'd happily take my D3100 - its capabilities as a camera doesn't outstrip my abilities as a digital photographer, and Im fairly confident it'll survive the exiting life i lead (read: careless with equipment).<br>

Its not quite the all rounder the D90 is, but it is cheaper and still represents a good price/feature balance for people just starting with DSLR's. <br>

Thanks for reading!</p>

 

<div></div>

<p>I dont think its a common fault. <br>

If the bill does seem a bit steep, consider this - boxed near mint F5's are going on eBay for about £300.<br>

I bought mine, a well used example with manual, strap, and spare battery holder for just £180 - however you're best off probably with just some lo-fi solution as suggested previously.<br>

Nikon museum? I would have definitely been up for that!</p>

<p>Ah yes that was it, the dial wasn't <em>quite </em>at zero! <br>

Thanks for the link too.</p>

<p>Ive just got an FE2 (sans manual) and after a few days both the + and - started appearing in the viewfinder, unless the shutter speed is B or M250. The lightmeter still appears to work, so is it just an EOL battery indicator?<br>

Thanks.<br>

SS</p>

<p>A note from experience with failing power supplies...<br>

1) Buy a reputable well known brand ie. Corsair, OCZ, Hyper, Cooler-master <br>

2) Get one with a high power rating. If it were me, I would go 700 minimum for your setup.<br>

Also I would echo someone's suggestion about a more recent ATI graphics card - should be more power efficiant with the same performance...<br>

...unless you plan on using protein folding software, in which case Nvidia enjoy a massive advantage. If you don't know what I'm talking about, ignore this bit!</p>

<p>Ill try washing, but fortunately it hasn't really affected my keepers from that roll.<br>

I suppose I should let them know, but they are quite out of my way when not in university, and I did get it processed some 1/2 months ago, so equally I may just let it lie.</p>

<p>That was my initial thought. I asked for development only, otherwise they could (should) have noticed it during printing. <br>

However that will probably be the first and last time I take my film to them!</p>

<p>Here's the pic:</p><div></div>

<p>See attached photo - Can someone please suggest a possible source of these ugly things?<br /> Yep they're on the negatives. I had it processed at a local independent photo store.<br /> TIA.<br /> SS</p>

<p>Whatever you end up buying, buy a good photography book and read it. I was a novice until I picked up a EOS 300 (film) SLR earlier this year. I took pictures with it, and learnt the basics. But I also learnt a fair bit from reading my dads old copy of "the complete kodak guide to photography". <br>

On Film vs Digital, I only started with film because the cameras were a fraction of the cost. While I like shooting real film alot, its really made me appreciate the advantages of digital. Thats just my $0.02.</p>

<p>Well when I feel it, only one side feels rough - the outer one. Unfortunately I have no rubbing alcohol at the moment so i tried a little 45% bourbon, to no avail however. Although it now smells amazing.<br>

Ive taken a shot with it (the filter, not the bourbon) and ill put it up as soon as i get it processed.<br>

Regardless of how it comes out, Ive got my sights on a beautiful silver Nikon Y48, which hopefully shouldn't have the same issue...</p>

<p>I guess every cloud has a silver lining. Or at least a grainy one. </p>

<p>Wonderful.... Well thanks for the quick reply anyway.</p>

<p>I recently purchased a yellow filter for my bw film photography, specifically a vintage toshiba one [for its retro charm ;)]<br>

However, it is not perfectly clear and transparent; there are what appears to be grain or speckles as part of the glass (its not just dirt/dust), spread fairly consistently over the whole filter.<br>

Will this affect the image quality in any discernible way? - ie. did I buy a dud?<br>

I've attached a photo to better illustrate the issue.</p><div></div>