I've never been a Nikon fan but...

[Chan Tran]

I never owned a Leica because I always want an SLR and not an RF. However, I have spent time looking at the Leica M series in the stores. They are so well built and are beautiful but however I don't they would take a drop besides in my mind dropping a Leica is a sin. Dropping a Nikon isn't.

 

[BrianShaw]

... besides in my mind dropping a Leica is a sin. Dropping a Nikon isn't.

Maybe dropping a Nikon isn't a sin, but it is a rather sad thing even if it appears to survive unscathed.

 

[guangong]

I dropped my wife's brand new newly introduced m5 from my hands to a solid marble floor at Kennedy airport and the only damage was the frame counter was knocked out of position. My own m3 and m4 as well as IIIa have taken tumbles. The cameras made by Leitz are quite robust. What came after multiple owners exploited the brand name is another story. My only Nikons are f and Nikormat which I have also used since late 1960s. An f with 45mm pancake lens and straight prism will take abuse and is convenient to carry about. I also use Nikons in hostile environments instead of Leicaflexes, mainly because of the difference in the cost of the lenses. Personally, I never understood carrying around the bulky the phototomic meter. A plus is that my f works perfectly without a meter!

 

[Les Sarile]

I appreciate the fact that Nikon saw fit to design and release the FM3A in 2001.

 

[Sirius Glass]

It was a ballsy move by Canon to abandon the FD mount and adopt the EF mount. Who wouldn't've wanted to observe all the boardroom decision making at Canon Headquarters for that?

Yes, they took a short term drop in loyalty and consequent sales, but their decision was ultimately the correct one (*). To this day, any EOS body made between 1987 and today works perfectly with any EF lens made between 1987 and today.

With Nikon, there's an approximate 20-year sliding window between bodies and lenses where you have perfect compatibility. When either a body or lens exceed that range, there may be some loss of functionality. Thus we have these indispensable charts, the best on the internet:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/compatibility-lens.htm

(*) alas, if you're fond of smooth weighted manual focusing helicoids and having real aperture rings, then it's not.

This website was really hard to read, and Im not sure I still understand the difference between the two AI lenses. The writer jumps all over the place from different types of cameras, to different lenses and still doesn't make much of a point.

Anyway, I'm definitely a Nikon convert. Every single one of my cameras still work and they look like they've been chewed on and dropped off of a cliff.

I am amazed that Ken Rockwell actually wrote something that is usable; however his ability to muddle his thoughts in his writing shows that his legacy and reputation are deserved.

 

[Alan Gales]

I am amazed that Ken Rockwell actually wrote something that is usable; however his ability to muddle his thoughts in his writing shows that his legacy and reputation are deserved.

Ken has written some good stuff. For example his articles on the Tachihara 4x5 and Novation studio lights are good.

I agree that some of his writing is muddled. He tends to contradict himself a lot too.

 

[Theo Sulphate]

... I have spent time looking at the Leica M series in the stores. They are so well built and are beautiful but however I don't they would take a drop besides in my mind dropping a Leica is a sin. ...

Marketing opportunity for Leica! The ruggedized (rubberized?) M.

I appreciate the fact that Nikon saw fit to design and release the FM3A in 2001.

Agreed. I love Nikon for the FM3a.

 

[Chan Tran]

I don't think so Theo! A ruggedized Leica M would look ugly and no I don't think Leica would sell well if the buyers don't think they are good looking.

 

[trondsi]

I just bought a Nikon FM, and I think I am converted to Nikon for good as far as 35mm goes.
One really great thing about Nikon: they still produce and sell film cameras. If I were rich I would buy a brand new Nikon F6, partially just to show my support (but also to use the thing of course, there are many good reviews of the F6 out there)

 

[John Koehrer]

Non-AI=back of aperture ring smooth. Won't mount on newer cameras EXCEPT FM & FE
AI=Has a "finger" that engages metering ring on body.
AIS=Externally the mount looks the same as AI but has a post and small machined notch in the mount itself.
The post & notch allow matrix metering only on cameras that have the feature.

 

[monkowa]

Non-AI=back of aperture ring smooth. Won't mount on newer cameras EXCEPT FM & FE
AI=Has a "finger" that engages metering ring on body.
AIS=Externally the mount looks the same as AI but has a post and small machined notch in the mount itself.
The post & notch allow matrix metering only on cameras that have the feature.

The differences in Ai and Ai-S seems pretty negligible. The non-Ai lenses on the other hand are pretty obvious. They're pretty damn cheap too!

 

[MartinCrabtree]

There is a difference between Ai and Ais (most noticeable when "chipped") using cameras that allow setting of aperture via thumbwheel like the F5 and the electronic gear. The progression of the Ais glass is compatible with it and Ai glass is not. You'll find up to a 1 1/2 stop difference from what you dial up. It is the linkage that sets the aperture that causes it. I tested mine and just use the +/- compensation or simply use the aperture ring on cameras that allow it. Just a heads up for those that experiment with this stuff.

 

[DREW WILEY]

I could have bought an immaculate FM not long ago, but didn't need it. My favorite is the FM2n. I also have an FM3a - a nice updated machine but with
some redundant features I choose to ignore. One bell or whistle is too many for me!

 

[RalphLambrecht]

I have a chrome FM2n. They're great and are pretty much equivalent to Nikon's flagship camera of the time, the F3.

for 35mm, I'm Nikon all the way since 1972;also like their optics;just as good as Zeiss in my opinion.

 

[guangong]

Ralph,
Many Nikon lenses should be as good as Zeiss since, because of Communist aggressiveness after WWII, the Japanese optical industry was given a boost by access to German patents. Nikon at first was a Zeiss clone but soon began to make improvements either in more efficient manufacturing methods, product improvement or both. My f2.5 180mm Nikon lens was an improved answer to Zeiss f2.8 180mm lens. I use both on my 2000fcm but that f0.3 increase in speed came at the expense of a lot more weight!
You seem to enjoy Florida. I am still held captive in NJ.

 

[RattyMouse]

Ralph,
Many Nikon lenses should be as good as Zeiss since, because of Communist aggressiveness after WWII, the Japanese optical industry was given a boost by access to German patents. Nikon at first was a Zeiss clone but soon began to make improvements either in more efficient manufacturing methods, product improvement or both. My f2.5 180mm Nikon lens was an improved answer to Zeiss f2.8 180mm lens. I use both on my 2000fcm but that f0.3 increase in speed came at the expense of a lot more weight!
You seem to enjoy Florida. I am still held captive in NJ.

Zeiss lenses have a look that, to me, are instantly noticeable. The T* coating is something very unique to Zeiss and not something I ever find with my Nikon lenses.

 

[Huss]

I dropped my wife's brand new newly introduced m5 from my hands to a solid marble floor at Kennedy airport and the only damage was the frame counter was knocked out of position. My own m3 and m4 as well as IIIa have taken tumbles. The cameras made by Leitz are quite robust. What came after multiple owners exploited the brand name is another story. My only Nikons are f and Nikormat which I have also used since late 1960s. An f with 45mm pancake lens and straight prism will take abuse and is convenient to carry about. I also use Nikons in hostile environments instead of Leicaflexes, mainly because of the difference in the cost of the lenses. Personally, I never understood carrying around the bulky the phototomic meter. A plus is that my f works perfectly without a meter!

I never owned a Leica because I always want an SLR and not an RF. However, I have spent time looking at the Leica M series in the stores. They are so well built and are beautiful but however I don't they would take a drop besides in my mind dropping a Leica is a sin. Dropping a Nikon isn't.

http://www.35mmc.com/19/03/2016/zeiss-ikon/

" I’ve dropped Leicas, from a height, and done more damage to the floor than I have the camera – and that’s not an exaggeration."

 

[rpavich]

http://www.35mmc.com/19/03/2016/zeiss-ikon/

" I’ve dropped Leicas, from a height, and done more damage to the floor than I have the camera – and that’s not an exaggeration."

That's fortunate because one surf of the Leica forums would show that that's the exception. In my case, it took a 6" (yes inch) drop to jam up a lens that had to be repaired. I've read folks complaining that even small-ish bumps misaligning the RF mechanism also.
I'm MUCH less confident in my M6 than my FM2 for sure.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Interesting argument I've heard over and over as long as I can remember: the "special look" of "German" Zeiss lenses versus Nikon. Well, by now
everyone knows you can simply buy real Zeiss lenses with their special look for your classic Nikon SLR's. Of course, they're made in Japan too.

 

[KrankyKraut]

I have/had a bunch of different Nikon manual and auto focus bodies. My favorites are the Nikon EL-2 and the N2000, plus the N80. The EL-2 is so solid, maybe my favorite..

 

[benveniste]

There is a difference between Ai and Ais (most noticeable when "chipped") using cameras that allow setting of aperture via thumbwheel like the F5 and the electronic gear. The progression of the Ais glass is compatible with it and Ai glass is not. You'll find up to a 1 1/2 stop difference from what you dial up. It is the linkage that sets the aperture that causes it. I tested mine and just use the +/- compensation or simply use the aperture ring on cameras that allow it. Just a heads up for those that experiment with this stuff.

Unless the lens is chipped, the F5 treats AI and AIs glass the same way. Since it only allows manual and aperture priority mode and you have to use the aperture ring, the non-linear action of the aperture lever has no effect. The only cameras which treat unchipped AI and AIs lenses differently are the Nikon FG, Nikon FA, the N2000/F301, the N2020/F501, and (supposedly) the F4/F4s.

 

[ColColt]

I started out with Nikon Back around 1977-78 and had the FE and FM, all new then. The little FM was a pleasure to shoot and I assume it's siblings, the FM2, FM3, etc are as good or better. I've never dropped a camera(knock on wood) and would probably have a coronary right on the spot if I did.

I'm not 100% brand oriented as evidenced by three M's I have but they all do the job and do it well. I wouldn't hesitate any FM type Nikon...great little cameras but my preference has become the F2 series. I like the looks and heft of them and more system oriented.

 

[John_Nikon_F]

Unless the lens is chipped, the F5 treats AI and AIs glass the same way. Since it only allows manual and aperture priority mode and you have to use the aperture ring, the non-linear action of the aperture lever has no effect. The only cameras which treat unchipped AI and AIs lenses differently are the Nikon FG, Nikon FA, the N2000/F301, the N2020/F501, and (supposedly) the F4/F4s.

And, the F4/F4s/F4E matrix meter with AI lenses, too. The AIS lenses really are only meant for the FG, FA, N2000/2020, for program mode, due to the linear diaphragm movement. None of the other bodies care about the AIS features if the lenses aren't chipped.

To the OP, welcome to the FM2 fold... Been an FM2/FM2n user/abuser for most of the time since '91. No longer own my original FM2n, but the one I have today subsitutes for it quite nicely.

-J

 

[Huss]

That's fortunate because one surf of the Leica forums would show that that's the exception. In my case, it took a 6" (yes inch) drop to jam up a lens that had to be repaired. I've read folks complaining that even small-ish bumps misaligning the RF mechanism also.
I'm MUCH less confident in my M6 than my FM2 for sure.

I bought my M7 from a gentleman in Colombia (!). When I received the package, the customs people in Colombia had opened it up to check what was in it, then put the camera back in loose, outside the padding that it originally was wrapped in.
When I got the box I was horrified, as the outside looked like it was treated like a football and I could here the camera loose inside bouncing around.
But - no issues whatsoever, including with the focus! I am very impressed by how well these are made.

You're issue seems to be with the lens, not the body. I have no experience with how much abuse those could take. Was it a Leica lens?

 

[rpavich]

I bought my M7 from a gentleman in Colombia (!). When I received the package, the customs people in Colombia had opened it up to check what was in it, then put the camera back in loose, outside the padding that it originally was wrapped in.
When I got the box I was horrified, as the outside looked like it was treated like a football and I could here the camera loose inside bouncing around.
But - no issues whatsoever, including with the focus! I am very impressed by how well these are made.

You're issue seems to be with the lens, not the body. I have no experience with how much abuse those could take. Was it a Leica lens?

Yes, it was a Leica lens but from my time surfing the Leica forum I can say that your experience is unique and lucky. Glad to hear it, others haven't been so fortunate.