Manual focus Nikon with good viewfinder.

film_guy said:

What about the FM10? I heard it's a pretty good manual camera.

Click to expand...

I bought an FM-10 for a friend. Except for a working built-in meter it didn't compare well to the Nikon F and Nikkormat cameras I regularly use. The kit lens was a dog, and the body gave some trouble. The Nikon F was part of a great system, with a focusing screen for almost every purpose.

The FM10 is an embarassment IMO when compared to the previous FM and FE series cameras. Cheap build, bad viewfinder. The N80 is a nice camera if you want a cheap AF body. But VF wise it is very mediocre and the meter doesn't work with MF lenses. I do a lot of macro stuff and the N90s, F100, F3 etc simply blow the N80 away in terms of manual focussing ability.

-A

I would seriously consider the F3HP as a good all round camera, regardless whether it is your main camera, or secondary camera.

With the HP finder it is excellent, put in the type "E" focusing screen with the horizontal and vertical reference lines and you have a screen that can use any Nikkor lens, no matter how small the f stop of the lens is. The type "B" focusing screen is the same as the "E" except it doesn't have the lines. Both of these screens are the only ones which are suitable for any Nikkor lens, including the f/11 1200 nikkor, which I once had one of my F3's attached to for a roll of film.

The excellent DW-3 waist level finder is fantastic for overhead shops using a 24mm lens and the camera held at arms length above one's head.

The DW-4 6X magnification finder is an absolute eye opener for focusing on fiddly stuff. One of the more exotic uses for this finder, is for close focusing the 105 f/2.5 lens.

It works like this:- Place the camera in portrait mode, on it's side. One then focuses critically on an eye or part of an eye, or wherever, as soon as critical focus is reached you squeeze the shutter button. This ensures accurate critical focus with very interesting out of focus parts of your scene. The 85 f/1.4 doesn't work as well, however the 180 ED f/2.8 is also a good prospect for this close focusing. It at first is a bit funny standing on the side of the tripod for focusing, but like backwards pictures on the focusing screen, one soon comes to grips with this.

I also have the DA-2 Action, or sports finder. This is terrific for focusing whilst wearing a motorcycle helmet or working in very cold weather and you are wearing a hooded jacket with draw strings and possibly goggles so your eyes don't water in the super cold wind. You can focus perfectly with the camera between 100 to 250mm away from your eyes.

The F3 also has an advantage over most cameras manufactured after it. It doesn't have a permanently attached drive! With the F3 I put the body in one jacket pocket, in the other pocket I carry a lens. Yes they are weighty, but they travel exceptionally well when transported in a broken down form.

The F3 was Nikon's third major model and more or less by this time, they had perfected the camera body. With the almost endless array of accessories, you can photograph virtually anything.

The absolute quality that went into the manufacturing of this particular mass produced manual focus camera, has not been equalled either before or after.

At least that is my view after using this camera for over 23 years, whilst slowly acquiring little bits and pieces which have enhanced it's capabilities enormously

Mick.

All good points about the F3. If Nikon had managed to put a normal hotshoe on that body for easy flash work, it would be a truly perfect camera.

-A

Amund said:

epharis, I have a absolutely fantastic 105mm f/2.5 Ais, and will probably add something wide-ish too...

Click to expand...

I have one too.

I recommend you consider the 24mm f2 AIS or 35mm f1.4 AIS. I love 'em both. Add a 50mm f1.4 AIS and the 105mm f2.5 AIS you mention and I could photograph forever and not need any additional lenses.

Anupam Basu said:

All good points about the F3. If Nikon had managed to put a normal hotshoe on that body for easy flash work, it would be a truly perfect camera.

-A

Click to expand...

Actually, they did - it was the F3 press and it had a normal hot-shoe on it. Unfortunately, they didn't make very many of them and they're hard to find and expensive.

Mick Fagan said:

I would seriously consider the F3HP as a good all round camera, regardless whether it is your main camera, or secondary camera.


Mick.

Click to expand...

If you don't wear glasses, the F3 with the standard DE-2 finder can be had for a little less money and has slightly higher magnification (.8x vs. .75x) than the DE-3 (high-eyepoint) finder.

ehparis said:

I have one too.

I recommend you consider the 24mm f2 AIS or 35mm f1.4 AIS. I love 'em both. Add a 50mm f1.4 AIS and the 105mm f2.5 AIS you mention and I could photograph forever and not need any additional lenses.

Click to expand...

Hmmm,
that's what I said, at least a dozen lenses ago (and at least as many years ago, probably more), though my 35 is an f2, Nikkor O-C.


erie

No doubt, the F3HP finder is among the best in the business. I've used, but don't own, an F4S and the finder of that camera is at least as good. The same is true for the F5. The ability to use matrix metering may or may not be much of a consideration for you. I have no problems with the old fashioned center weighted type myself.

Another vote for the F3HP. The more I use it, the more I love it! Coupled with the MD4 motordrive, it has the best possible weight distribution and feel of any other Nikon camera I have used.

I have both a couple of F3/MD4's and an F4, at least on the F3, I can get an action finder at a reasonable price, they seem to be non-existent or overpriced ($90 to $140 or so for a DA2, vs $200+ for a DA20). If you've never used one, you have no idea what you're missing.


erie

dslater said:

If you don't wear glasses, the F3 with the standard DE-2 finder can be had for a little less money and has slightly higher magnification (.8x vs. .75x) than the DE-3 (high-eyepoint) finder.

Click to expand...

Good point, I don`t use glasses.


Everybody: thanks for an amazing number of good replies to my little question.


ebay, here I come

Amund, I have found that it is normally a matter of time, before most of us wear glasses!

Mick.

Mick Fagan said:

Amund, I have found that it is normally a matter of time, before most of us wear glasses!

Mick.

Click to expand...

I use contact lenses...

Touché

Mick.

A late vote for the venerable F2. I used to work at an AV house, creating computer synchronized, multi-projector slide shows -- you haven't lived until you've stood next to 32 Ektagraphics cranking away at 24 slides per minute! We had three cameras -- two F2's and an F3HP. The F2 pin registers out of the box; the F3 required a custom fabricated pin back to register as closely. They use run of the mill silver oxide batteries (that last too long to calculate) that ONLY power the meter prism, are built like tanks, feel oh-so-nice in the hands, have a shutter speed range of 8s - 1/2000, infinitely variable between 1/80 and 1/2000 (and, in reality, between 8s and 2s...) all masterfully mechanically timed and have a 100% viewfinder (the F3, if I recall, was either 96 or 98%).

Neanderman said:

A late vote for the venerable F2. ... They ... have a 100% viewfinder (the F3, if I recall, was either 96 or 98%).

Click to expand...

The F, F2, F3, F4, F5 and F6 all have a 100% viewfinder.

The only 96%-ish viewfinder of which I'm aware is the F100's.

The other points are valid though.

The F2 goes for a lot more than even F5`s in good condition, so it`s not on my list... And it`s...ugly...


Anyhoo, a friend just offered me to buy his just-CLA`ed Rolleiflex 3.5F (Planar) at a price I just can`t refuse, so I`ll put the F3 on hold for a few weeks...

Amund said:

The F2 goes for a lot more than even F5`s in good condition, so it`s not on my list... And it`s...ugly...


Anyhoo, a friend just offered me to buy his just-CLA`ed Rolleiflex 3.5F (Planar) at a price I just can`t refuse, so I`ll put the F3 on hold for a few weeks...

Click to expand...

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder! IMO, the F2 is Nikon's second greatest looking camera design of all time, first place going to the original F with standard finder. If you look closely at the design of the F2 prism heads you will be able to appreciate the amount of artistic functionality that went into the design as opposed to the F5 or F100 that hides all of its functions beneath a large, rounded carcas. The design of the F2 invites the observer to believe he is using a photographic tool, a well made machine that challenges its user to create stunning images. It is a similar feeling to riding a classic motorcycle with all the engine parts visible instead of being hidden under a colorful plastic shell.

Like all classical enginering masterpieces, the F2 is functional, useable work of art.

Another EMPHATIC vote for the F3HP.

Another vote for the F3HP. The HP finder provides full access to the F3's bright screen. Aside from these comments, the F3 is the ultimate manual focus Nikon.

What about the FM2n, it's rugged, reliable & has a bright viewfinder? Only needs batteries for metering and has a top shutter speed of 1/4000th sec. It can take a motor drive. It was in production from the early 80's up to 2001, so there are lots around and the later ones won't need their light seals renewing. They are more robust than the autofocus bodies, some of whose aging electronics can give rise to problems. As the years go by that's likely to become more common but the FM2n being all mechanical should be repairable for years to come.

I too am in this position but am favoring the purchase of the brightscreen. The reason for this is that other than the inability to focus manually in confidence it is for me the perfect body (except the F6 jewel ... for when the lottery people get their numbers right for once)
My concern is that I will often find situations where in the older bodies, lacking great autofocus - I will be giving up on shooting scenarios which the F100 handles so well with its very capable auto-focus. So a brightscreen would give me the best of all worlds. Also, having one F100 I like the thought of another F100 for having a different speed film always available and I really value carrying the identical bodies. I guess my brain does not switch back and forth as easily as others.

So despite the moderate cost, it seems that the bright-screen is the perfect answer.

The FM10 is a cheap entry-level camera.

I would opt for an FM-2.

F3HP. The F4 variations have always struck me as a bit heavier than they should be. The F3 was in production longer than the F4. That may say something of the high opinion for which it is held.