Nikkormat Ft2 + lens question

Jon Buffington · May 16, 2016

I shoot some Nikon (have an FM, fg-20 and some e-series lenses) but am a novice mostly to this system. More knowledgeable regarding values in canon, leica and Minolta. I have been offered a Nikkormat Ft2 in like new condition, fully functioning (just needs new light seals), a mint 50/1.4, 28/3.5 and 50/3.5 macro. What one would one value this kit at? Off the top of my head I was thinking retail about 3-350 usd. He wants me to make him an offer. I don't want to offend him neither do I want to overextend an inflated offer. Basically he says he does not use it and wants it in a home where it will get use. He is giving me his N90 (sans lens) but does want some compensation for the above listed gear. Thoughts?

frank · May 16, 2016

IMO, $150 would be fair, considering that film is dead.

Jon Buffington · May 16, 2016

frank said:
IMO, $150 would be fair, considering that film is dead.

Yeah, along the lines of what I was willing to offer. I am not a reseller, just an enthusiast user whom has an opportunity at what looks to be a nice kit in like new condition. FWIW, the ft2 is black which I like. Not the chrome and black.

Jon Buffington · May 16, 2016

So maybe I answered my own question. Comparing prices on KEH, retail maybe 200-300.

Huss · May 16, 2016

Check to make sure the light meter still works/is accurate. It only takes one 1.5V cell so that should be easy enough.
That will effect the price.

Jon Buffington · May 16, 2016

Good call Huss. Checking now

Jon Buffington · May 16, 2016

Meter works. Speed appear accurate down to 1 sec (my very unscientific by hearing monitoring method).

Jon Buffington · May 16, 2016

APUGuser19 said:
They are the best Japanese camera ever made, but are worthless. About $35.

How about with the like new 50/1.4, 50/3.5 macro and 28/3.5 with the kit? Glass is clean.

Theo Sulphate · May 16, 2016

Nikkormat FT2 is an extremely good camera and is undervalued today (people don't appreciate it).

Some have sold for silly money (under $15) from shops or stores that just wanted to get rid of it - but don't let that fool you. It is a high quality camera.

Considering it is like new, the meter works, it's black, and there are three good lenses, I would say $175-$200.

Jon Buffington · May 16, 2016

Thank you Theo. I appreciate your response.

Huss · May 17, 2016

Jon Buffington said:
How about with the like new 50/1.4, 50/3.5 macro and 28/3.5 with the kit? Glass is clean.

Ignore the worthless statement...
If the camera is in like new shape, you could get $100 - $150 for it. The FT2 is IMO the best of the Nikkormats, which is why I have two! Uses every non AI and AI lens made. FT3 cannot do that.

Like new 50 1.4 would be between $80-$100 if that is indeed the condition
Like new 50 3.5 $75
Like new 28 3.5 $75
This if the lenses are like new (and you could actually get more)

As a package deal you would offer less. And the fact that there would be no hassle in selling e.g. not having to deal with people like APUGUser19 who claim it is worthless... then I think Theo's estimate is very fair.

blockend · May 17, 2016

Nikkormats are undervalued, and listening to the latest FPP podcast it seems the Nikon F is also out of fashion. I don't know why this should be, as they're excellent cameras, if a little heavy. With a few exceptions, the SLR film camera is not popular in 2016.

I recently bought 35mm and 28mm Nikkors in box condition for about £100.

cuthbert · May 17, 2016

For info only, last year I bought a FT3 with Nikkor 50mm f2 AI for 50 quid.

John_Nikon_F · May 17, 2016

The FT2, I'd probably pay $80-$90 for. $150 is a bit high. Back in the late '90s, that was pretty reasonable. 50/1.4... Depends on the version. But, probably about $90 if truly mint with no fungus anywhere, nor scratches, and minimal dust. 28/3.5, probably closer to $40-$50. Again, depends on the version. 55/3.5, $75 seems reasonable, cosmetically. So, maybe throw an offer of $180 or so out there and see if they'll bite. I suspect they will.

FT2 (and FT3) bodies with properly working meters are kinda scarce, btw. About 80% of the bodies I come across have at least some jumpiness in the meter needle, typically caused by moving the shutter speed ring and not the coupling ring. Whereas, most of the FTn bodies I've owned have been smooth in operation. Even the ones that are so dented that they look like they've melted into a silver/black ball with a lens mount. The meter cells do sometimes go bad. I recommend setting the ASA to 400, then set the lens to f/8 with the lens cap on. Turn the meter on and set the shutter speed to 1/60. It should remain at full underexposure. If the needle centers itself, then at least one cell is bad.

Currently have two FTn bodies. A chrome Nikkormat body that I bought for $10, and a black Nikomat version that I bought for $24. The black body had some cosmetic damage, but worked fine and had new light seals. Replaced the top cover with one from another black FTn. Looks decent now. The chrome body's issue was that the shutter speed indicator strip had come off the pulleys.

-J

Huss · May 17, 2016

cuthbert said:
For info only, last year I bought a FT3 with Nikkor 50mm f2 AI for 50 quid.

What condition was it in? That's the key bit of information. The OP states his example is Like New.

cooltouch · May 18, 2016

I agree that, for the package, $150-200 is ballpark. I'd be incline to offer $150. You can always go up in price, but it's really hard to go down when you're the one making the offer.

With the lenses, price is somewhat determined by the series. Since this is an FT2, it's likely that they're pre-AI lenses, thus not worth as much on the used market as AI or AIs lenses. Not saying it's "right," just that's the way it is. I have an early 55mm f/3.5 Micro-Nikkor that is one of the two sharpest lenses I own -- the other is a 55mm f/2.8 AIs Micro Nikkor. I also own a couple other pre-AI Nikkors that I have no desire getting rid of to acquire later versions. And there's at least one more pre-AI Nikkor that I'm gonna buy one of these days. But then I'm an iconoclastic, atavistic, anachronism -- so that has to be taken into account as well.

cuthbert · May 18, 2016

Huss said:
What condition was it in? That's the key bit of information. The OP states his example is Like New.

Actually pretty good, I wouldn't call a 38 years old camera "as new" but it needed no CLA, the lightmeter was working, the lens clean etc...

I also bought a 300mm f4 AI with it, so in the end they made me £150, that was the money they wanted just for the lens...in short the camera and the 50mm was given to me as a gift.

The only problem I experience was a light leak but I think it was me misloading the camera, this is the FT3:

The complete kit (including the HP5 film I extorted as gift):

Test pics with the 50mm F2:

With the 300mm::

Although I do dig the camera and I appreciate its building quality and sturdiness (it looks even tougher than my F2s as it's monolithic) I must confess I haven't used it since then as it's almost as heavy as an F2, the "recoil" of the vertical shutter is in the Praktica range and I feel other cameras of the same era (Canon FTb, Pentax K series) were more refined offering the same building quality.

blockend · May 18, 2016

cuthbert said:
Although I do dig the camera and I appreciate its building quality and sturdiness (it looks even tougher than my F2s as it's monolithic) I must confess I haven't used it since then as it's almost as heavy as an F2, the "recoil" of the vertical shutter is in the Praktica range and I feel other cameras of the same era (Canon FTb, Pentax K series) were more refined offering the same building quality.

The Nikkormat's copal square shutter is very sturdy and doesn't exhibit any more bounce than average for the era. I also own an FTb and have owned K-series Pentax cameras, and the Nikkormat is superior to either in build quality, in my opinion. On the weight issue it's impossible to disagree, and part of the reason so many are still around and functioning.

cuthbert · May 18, 2016

blockend said:
The Nikkormat's copal square shutter is very sturdy and doesn't exhibit any more bounce than average for the era. I also own an FTb and have owned K-series Pentax cameras, and the Nikkormat is superior to either in build quality, in my opinion. On the weight issue it's impossible to disagree, and part of the reason so many are still around and functioning.

Not quite, the recoil of the old Copal shutter of the Nikkormat is pretty strong, as strong as a Praktica of the same era, the FM has an improved design and it doesn't shake like the 'mat. The Seiko electronic shutter used on the Pentax K2 and K2DMD is also much smoother.

IMO the building quality of the FTb is higher as the machine is much smother and refined in comparison to the 'mat, and in term of sturdiness I don't view a Pentax KM or K1000 weaker than the 'mat. I think Nikkormats were popular because the F2 was "the" professional camera, but they were very expensive and the FT allowed an amateur to use the same Nikon glass.

Regarding the 50mm f2 AI according to some on the internet it was supposed to be a "super lens", while in reality I found it a pretty average performer, the bokeh is uninteresting and for instance a Soviet Helios 81N has more or less the same resolution and better out of focus performance.

I also consider Takumars 55m f2 and 1.8 better performers and I greatly prefer my AI'd Nikkor 50mm f1.4 S-C as all around performer.

cooltouch · May 18, 2016

I agree about the Copal square shutter. To me it's vibration isn't intrusive. As for comparing it to the FTb and K-series Pentaxes, well, I own a couple of FTbs, a few K-series Pentaxes (KX, KM, and K2), a couple of Spotmatics, and a Nikkormat FT3 as well as a Nikon EL2. I find it very difficult to make any judgements regarding which is the more rugged camera with a superior build quality. Face it, all of these cameras were built to a very high standard of quality. Which is the reason why there are so many around some 40 years or more (or a bit less) since they were built. My first real workhorse camera was an FTb, and I guess I still have a soft spot in my heart for it, even though I consider the Pentaxes and the Nikons to be its equal in terms of build quality. There is one aspect about the FTb that I prefer over the others, though -- and that is the FTb's partial area metering pattern. It's the same as the one found in the original Canon F-1. For shooting slides, to this day, I haven't found a metering system that works better than this one. Nikon's 60/40 pattern is good and quite practical but lacks the precision the FTb's has, while Pentax's pattern is just mildly centerweighted.

cuthbert · May 18, 2016

Yes I agree that almost all camera of the 70s offer a great building quality (even the smaller names) and the Canon partial metering system was indeed very handy.

The FTb is a very good and underrated camera IMO, it offers 90% of what a F-1n can give you in a slightly smaller package, the father of a friend of mine bought one new in 1973 and still looks new and perfect now.

blockend · May 18, 2016

cooltouch said:
Face it, all of these cameras were built to a very high standard of quality. Which is the reason why there are so many around some 40 years or more (or a bit less) since they were built.

Yes, I'd agree with that. It's more down to preference and access to lenses for a modern user. I still maintain that for gauge of steel used and manufacturing tolerances the Nikkormat was the best non-professional camera available, and non-AI lenses are unsurpassed on quality of construction alone. In 2016 those factors may be insufficient to turn things in Nikon's favour.

RalphLambrecht · May 18, 2016

Theo Sulphate said:
Nikkormat FT2 is an extremely good camera and is undervalued today (people don't appreciate it).

Some have sold for silly money (under $15) from shops or stores that just wanted to get rid of it - but don't let that fool you. It is a high quality camera.

Considering it is like new, the meter works, it's black, and there are three good lenses, I would say $175-$200.

I agree.An

Jon Buffington said:
I shoot some Nikon (have an FM, fg-20 and some e-series lenses) but am a novice mostly to this system. More knowledgeable regarding values in canon, leica and Minolta. I have been offered a Nikkormat Ft2 in like new condition, fully functioning (just needs new light seals), a mint 50/1.4, 28/3.5 and 50/3.5 macro. What one would one value this kit at? Off the top of my head I was thinking retail about 3-350 usd. He wants me to make him an offer. I don't want to offend him neither do I want to overextend an inflated offer. Basically he says he does not use it and wants it in a home where it will get use. He is giving me his N90 (sans lens) but does want some compensation for the above listed gear. Thoughts?

I agree with most responses but offering anything below $100 is an insult.

BradS · May 18, 2016

recently picked up an Ft-N with 50mm f/1.4 in excellent working condition for $45. I've been shopping for the 28mm f/3.5 and they seem to go for anywhere between $15 and $60 but, most of them go for right around $40~$50.

SO, yeah I'd agree that $150 for the whole kit is a pretty fair price. considering that the body needs service (albeit minor), I personally wouldn't go above $175

Theo Sulphate · May 18, 2016

cuthbert said:
...

The complete kit (including the HP5 film I extorted as gift):

...

Odd place for Nikon to have put the JCII sticker - better than putting it on the rear element though.

Nice kit - the photos you made with it are excellent.

Nikkormat Ft2 + lens question

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency