I well remember back in 1980 when the F3 was introduced. I was living in New York at the time. There was a mass rush by professionals to buy up the last F2 Nikons. I have a feeling that they were not being stupid. - David LygaNever owned a FM or FM2, did own a F, F2 and F3P, the F2 is a very solid camera, it remained in production after the F3 was released as many pro PJs did not trust the electronic shutter on the F3. Of the 2, my choice would be a F2, in mint condition will last many many years of hard abuse. Only reason I bought the F3 was my employer paid for 1/2.
Interesting: I had thought that FM2 had all the quality that was possible. Maybe one cannot beat the era of when the USD was superior to the yen and maybe a weaker dollar forced Japan to make some cost cutting with the FM2. This is a possibility. - David LygaWithout a second thought. F2. I have a fe and also f2’s. Never shot a fm. But just the winding mech on the f2 vs the fe/fm is worth it on the f2.
Ultimately, which would you choose to own? Which is more reliable for the decades to come? The Nikon F2 or the NIkon FM2?
Now decide which SLR you wish to be married to and offer reasons as to 'why'.
NO FAIR!!!! You got all of 'em.If I had to make a choice . . .
NO FAIR!!!! You got all of 'em.
Just out of curiosity as a non Nikon user but what is the evidence that the F2 is more robustly built? NB This question seeks genuine information and is not a challenge that the evidence doesn't exist
Thanks
pentaxuser
Yes, you bring up points which I should have ironed out at the beginning. No, I am not interested in accessories for either camera. To be honest, what I was after was to know what is the 'definitive mechanical SLR', the very best ever created, the sine qua non of mechanical SLRs.. In sum, the 'MP Leica' of SLRs. That is all that I am after. And, I had presupposed that it was Nikon's second attempt, the F2. No, I do not want one. Actually three SR-Ts will do just as well as one Nikon F2 as far as reliability and longevity go. - David Lygamust ask you David, since you said do not regard the meter so would the other accessories should be in consideration? Motor drive, bulk film back, Polaroid back, waist level viewfinder etc..?
Assuming that you say none of those is applicable I would pick the F2 still but if you allow me to pick the plain prism F2. I had the F2AS when it was new and the meter played an important part in my choice. The motor drive is also an important factor for me but I never had the motor drive for the F2. I currently own an FM2n in excellent condition. With all that prerequisites following are the reasons for my choice of the F2 over the FM2n.
1. The design of the shutters of the 2 are quite different. I simply prefer the horizontal travel shutter knowing the advantages of the vertical shutter like higher top speed, higher flash sync speed but those 2 don't mean much to me. I like the simplicity of the horizontal shutter.
2. The F2 finder is 100% accurate and when looking into the viewfinder with any version of the prisms the image area is free of any protruding elements like shutter speeds display etc... Also I don't think there is a plain ground glass focusing screen available for the FM2n which is available for the F2. I prefer a very clean looking view in the finder.
3. The film advance of the F2 is relatively heavy compared to the FM2n and the F3 but it advances the film in very short stroke so I can advance the film much faster.
Oh, I do beg to differ. Whether with cars or with cameras, I assure you that there is plenty of 'objective destructive testing' involved at the factory before these beasts are brought to market. Plenty. No mercy is shown. - David LygaOther than the subjective option of Nikon users I doubt that there is any objective destructive testing comparing the 2 models side by side. In the day Modern and Popular Photography did testing, strip down testing, I don't recall ever seeing a side by side of the F2 and the FM.
Paul, the problem with the subjective opinion of Nikon users is, as I see it, dependent on how many users there are that respond and do so accurately . So for instance, a thousand users saying that they haven't had a problem with a F2 compared to even 100 users out of a thousand of the FM having problems may be indicative of the greater durability of the F2. Unfortunately on any user forum I have ever seen the evidence either way tends to be in single figures and always includes those with an "axe to grind". The problem with "axe grinders" is that in providing an answer to a straight question it isn't always clear that they have an "axe to grind"Other than the subjective option of Nikon users I doubt that there is any objective destructive testing comparing the 2 models side by side. In the day Modern and Popular Photography did testing, strip down testing, I don't recall ever seeing a side by side of the F2 and the FM.
As far as longevity goes I do not know which one would last longer. They are both well built. The FM2n was built in a less expensive manner but used more modern technology. I don't abuse my cameras so I can't really say which one would last longer. I had the F2AS for only 7 years. I bought it in 77 and it was stolen from me in 84. The used price on the F2AS is so expensive that I couldn't bring myself to buy another.Yes, you bring up points which I should have ironed out at the beginning. No, I am not interested in accessories for either camera. To be honest, what I was after was to know what is the 'definitive mechanical SLR', the very best ever created, the sine qua non of mechanical SLRs.. In sum, the 'MP Leica' of SLRs. That is all that I am after. And, I had presupposed that it was Nikon's second attempt, the F2. No, I do not want one. Actually three SR-Ts will do just as well as one Nikon F2 as far as reliability and longevity go. - David Lyga
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?