Nikon F2 vs Nikon FM2

[David Lyga]

This question's answer is not going to provide riveting and important information for those who practice analog photography as a routine endeavor. However, I find the question interesting because, here, we are delving into the inner sanctum of a real paradigm of perfection with regard to clockwork mechanisms. A viable answer is certainly going to be interesting to explore, but, even more so will be the interest garnered from the reasons for giving the answer which you offer.

Ultimately, which would you choose to own? Which is more reliable for the decades to come? The Nikon F2 or the NIkon FM2?

For purposes of this query assume the following, (even though these six hypotheticals are largely nonexistent, even laughable):

1) Neither body can be repaired, anywhere, at any time.
2) You cannot resell the body, ever.
3) Metering is not a factor to consider.
4) You have no opportunity to own any other SLR body, ever. You must remain with your original choice.
5) You must select the same lens for either SLR body, thus a 'newer' lens will not be a determining factor with your choice of SLR body.
6) Either SLR body is offered to you in absolutely mint condition.

Thus, your choice must be profoundly well thought out. With the FM2, you have the benefit of a decade or more of enhanced technological expertise, but I wonder if the materials used in the F2 are inherently better. Now decide which SLR you wish to be married to and offer reasons as to 'why'. - David Lyga

 

[NB23]

From what I understood, the Nikon F2 is the undestructible one.

 

[Paul Howell]

Never 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.

 

[David Lyga]

Never 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.

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 Lyga

 

[voceumana]

The FM2n is an entirely mechanical camera except for the meter. It's a reliable workhorse. The shutter travels vertically giving a high flash sync speed (1/250th) and a highest shutter speed of 1/4000. The shutter is titanium, so its release sounds a little "tinny", i.e., metallic. About the only feature it doesn't have is a mirror lockup, but the self timer releases the mirror immediately upon triggering, so it can act as a "poor man's" lock up.

I don't have an F2 nor have I used one.

 

[cjbecker]

Without 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.

 

[David Lyga]

Without 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.

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 Lyga

 

[Paul Howell]

The FM, FE, FA, were the replacement for the Nikkormat series of body, mid level, the EM and FG were entry level. Although very good, the FM was not built to Nikon F level of bodies. Saying that, a lot of pros used the FM, FA, as second body, or like Tim Curry at Nat Geo used the FM at times as his primary camera, my guess when he wanted to travel light.

 

[Paul Howell]

Good points, you can buy a second beater FM for donor parts.

 

[narsuitus]

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'.

I have used the Nikon F, F2, F3, F4, N70, N2000, and EM.
I own and use a Leica M6 35mm rangefinder and a Contax G1 35mm rangefinder.
I own and use medium format and large format cameras.
I have never owned or used a Nikon FM2.

I have been using the F2 since I bought my first one in 1972 when I traded my Nikon F for the Nikon F2. I now own and use three Nikon F2 cameras.

The F2 has all the features I need:
modular design
interchangeable viewfinder
interchangeable view screens
interchangeable backs
motor drive
mirror lock-up
100% viewfinder accuracy
durability and reliability
battery-free operation

If I had to wed only one camera for the rest of my life, it would be the Nikon F2, especially the Nikon F2 Titanium.


Nikon F2 by Narsuitus, on Flickr

 

[Les Sarile]

If I had to make a choice . . .

 

[David Lyga]

If I had to make a choice . . .

NO FAIR!!!! You got all of 'em.

 

[Les Sarile]

NO FAIR!!!! You got all of 'em.

Well it's not like we can buy them new so we get them where we can find them!

 

[Swordman]

A few years back, when I was researching which film camera to get, I went for the FM2n - it has better specs on paper. However, the F2 is definitely better built. I'd like to own one some day.
If it was my only camera, it would still have to be the FM2n. It's more compact, has an integrated hot shoe, faster shutter speed and it's all one piece - I consider removable parts a point of weakness. It's also extremely reliable, albeit not as well built as the F2.
If I could have another camera, then for sure the F2. It has a much more robust feel.

 

[pentaxuser]

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

 

[Chan Tran]

must 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.

 

[Paul Howell]

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

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.

 

[David Lyga]

must 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.

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

 

[David Lyga]

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.

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 Lyga

 

[Paul Howell]

The testing was done my Nikon, maybe for government buyers, not published, and not side by side F2 and FM.

 

[pentaxuser]

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.

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"

Occasionally we can identify problems from forums like the F100 door hinges but this tends to be the exception that proves the rule . As David has said there is almost certainly data that might reveal comparative strengths and weaknesses but that is held by Nikon and we are as likely to be privy to that as we are to what the real cost of Acros II is and whether its retail price accurately reflects its real cost

David, I assume has asked a theoretical question to see what comes out of the responses but in practical terms if the real objective is to help a person decide between the two models then one or better still several long term reliable Nikonians with personal experience of both models and who has had the skill ( and yes there is a skill here) to ask the right questions of fellow Nikonians might be the better bet in terms of useful information

pentaxuser

 

[David Lyga]

Actually, I am not even going that far. pentaxuser is boldly correct here. I am not necessarily asking for information to make a wise purchase decision. As I have already said, I am not after buying an F2. Thus, I do not find buying an F2 a 'wise purchase'. Why not? Nothing to do with quality. But, rather, because I can buy three SR-Ts or three Spotmatics for the same price, and having three allows me to be robbed of one, or drop one, without worry. That is how I quantify common sense.

Again, the sole reason for my inquiry is to find out which is the zenith of mechanical SLRs, nothing more, nothing arcane or obscure. It is nothing other than my curiosity, because I have so much respect for how Japan has transformed photography throughout the decades.

Oftentimes the problem with forums like this one, or others in different venues, is that many re-interpret the original intent and, maybe subliminally, construe or define an entirely different question than the one that originator has asked, simply because the initial query, disturbingly, does not fit into a neat, cookie-cutter mold. This is not a direct criticism, but, instead, an illumination of misguided interpretation. I am not asking for 'advice', 'direction' or even factors which would guide one's purchase. As I have said, to me, a better buy is to buy multiples of a somewhat lesser quality, because of the factors of potential loss though theft or damage. That said, even such objective information that I have asked can still be of use for those whose intentions differ from mine.

The questions have been asked; let us benefit according to our own specific needs. - David Lyga

 

[reddesert]

The zenith of mechanical SLRs is obviously the Zenit.

Trying to define the zenith of something, especially a tool, is really not objective or independent of what one intends to use it for.

There is a clear and objective difference, which is that the FM2 has its name on the front, while the F2 is labeled on top, and the FM on the rear. Therefore, if you want other people to be impressed by your manual camera, you should get the FM2, if you want to impress yourself, you should get the FM, and if you want it to be between you and a celestial being, you should get the F2.

 

[film_man]

It doesn't matter which one you'll get, they are mechanical cameras. At some point you have to service it or the shutter clockwork will seize from the dust/gunk build up. So get the one you enjoy more, no point putting up with something you don't like just because it may (or not) last longer.

 

[Chan Tran]

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

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.
I have a few SRT's and in fact I used an SRT101 for over 10 years in the period when I was broke but I would much rather use either of the Nikon's.