Nikon FM3a or Leica R8 / R9

[pkr1979]

Hi all,

So... what would you get/prefer of a Nikon FM3a or Leica R8 / R9, and why?

Cheers
Peter

 

[benjiboy]

I would prefer the Nikon because of the price and the availability of the lenses.

 

[M-88]

Probably a good idea for Huss to chime in. IIRC he used to own one of these Leicas with weird shape. BTW, Zenit 212K just as weird as R8/R9, how come it didn't get mentioned?

In all seriousness, I'd go for Nikon. I simply see no reason for lugging around an oversized Leica, whose lenses cost as much as a used car and in the end, performance difference between it and isn't going to live up to its price.

 

[Les Sarile]

Because I have already have one and it works well

 

[Nitroplait]

FM3a - or probably an FE2 because it has less plastic parts (well, I already have two of those).
Why? Lighter and more handy; lens availability and pricing and besides, Leica never really understood how to make an SLR that lived up to the brilliancy of their rangefinder cameras.
Nikon on the other hand ruled the SLR world for a couple of decades and the FM3a has the genes of those heydays.

 

[gone]

Never owned an FM3a, but have probably owned just about every other SLR that Nikon has made. I've been shooting Leica R lenses in stop down metering mode on Nikon cameras for 15 or 20 years. They're actually very fast to shoot if you use a camera w/ AE and AE Lock, and especially fast if the camera has motorized film advance. A Leica R lens looks like it belongs on the Nikons.

If you go this route, you'll only need one camera type for practically the whole Nikon and R lens lineups. There's really no Nikon lens that can equal a Leica R Summicron, even the Elmarits are amazing. They're not cheap though, but you won't get that sort of IQ anywhere else.

 

[Huss]

Had the FM3A and the FE2. Given the choice of either, I'd get the FE2 because in actual use it is the exact same thing but at about 1/4 of the price.

Currently have the R9, and it absolutely blows the FM3A out of the water. The only advantage the Nikon has is it works w/o batteries. The Leica has much better haptics - it may look weird but that is because it is designed to fit in your hand perfectly, with everything being in the exact right spot. With one finger and camera to eye you can change shutter speeds as well as select meter patterns. Leica has 3 meter patterns which all are awesome, Nikon has one (a very good one but just one nonetheless). VF info in the Leica is absolutely superb. Nikon is from 1980. With chipped ROM lenses, Leica's flash control is amazing, the way it automatically balances daylight is like nothing else.
Film loading is much quicker on the Leica. Multiple exposures are faultless and super easy. If you get either the winder or the motordrive, it seamlessly connects to the body and looks like it is part of the camera.
Nikon has a bigger and cheaper lens selection - most definitely. But any Leica lens you get will be astounding, and all that matters is are the lenses you need available?
Clue # 1 is people make kits to convert Leica lenses to other camera mounts - Leitax. I have never heard of someone converting a Nikon lens to be used on a Leica... ;p

There is one design flaw on the R8/R9. It should have a separate on/off switch. Instead it is incorporated into the exposure mode dial which is dumb.

Look how the metering handled this back lit shot:



Look how the flash balanced the outdoor and indoor lighting using direct on camera flash (SF24D):




And just because I like this one...



I'd actually pick a Nikon F3P or T over the FM3A. They handle better, feel better in hand, have the awesome 80/20 meter pattern, have a 100% vf and frankly feel special to use. The FM3A just feels like a run of the mill FM series camera. There's a reason I kept my F3P and sold off my FM series cameras.

 

[Paul Howell]

Never had the FM3 or any Leica SLR, the few R8 and 9 I've handled as Huss said, ergonomics are great. If you can afford a 9 and the lens you usually shoot with why not? Oh if you get the R9, how about the digital back?

 

[Disappointed_Horse]

Huss—the shadow detail in that second shot is lovely!

 

[Jim Jones]

My preferred camera since 1953 was Leica, later supplemented with Nikon gear for macro-photography and long lenses. The last Leica, a M4, retired after 40 years of hard service to make way for digital Nikons. Most of my photographs taken with those and other cameras over those decades would have been just as satisfactory with most other brands. Remember, many magnificent photos of 160 years ago were taken with cameras that seem terribly primitive today.

 

[Huss]

Huss—the shadow detail in that second shot is lovely!

I first tried taking that pic with an FM3A and she looked like Danny Trejo.

 

[xkaes]

Probably a good idea for Huss to chime in. IIRC he used to own one of these Leicas with weird shape. BTW, Zenit 212K just as weird as R8/R9, how come it didn't get mentioned?

Then why not mention the Phoenix P-5000?

 

[hap]

I passed on a functional R8 for 500$....and regretted it. It doesn't help when you know that fixing a R8 or R9 could be impossible.

 

[hap]

Hi all,

So... what would you get/prefer of a Nikon FM3a or Leica R8 / R9, and why?

Cheers
Peter

My black pristine FM3a has turned into an investment and unlikely to become passe as a iconic film camera. So I don't use it cuz every scratch or scrape becomes a liability. therefore my FM and FE perform duty. Leica cameras which I own don't include the electronic SLR's. Only have SL2 and a couple of 2cam lenses. However, if you can afford it and crave R8/R9 probably should get now before they all crash.

 

[Marcelo Paniagua]

+1 on the Nikon. SLR Leica lens are great but Nikon are great as well. Even though I don't use Nikon I've seen how good results you can get with them. Also, IMHO, Nikon SLR are more reliable.

 

[btaylor]

Really? You really want the Leica, let’s be honest. But you’re having a hard time justifying it to yourself. Just do it, make yourself happy. The Leica won’t make you a better photographer or actually make better pictures than a Nikon, we know this, but you’ll enjoy having it!

 

[reddesert]

Nikon has a bigger and cheaper lens selection - most definitely. But any Leica lens you get will be astounding, and all that matters is are the lenses you need available?
Clue # 1 is people make kits to convert Leica lenses to other camera mounts - Leitax. I have never heard of someone converting a Nikon lens to be used on a Leica... ;p

I don't have an opinion about the original question. They seem like rather different cameras so I'm not sure why they would be directly compared. The Leica R flange-focal distance is 47mm and the Nikon F mount is 46.5mm. So one reason you don't hear about people converting Nikon lenses to mount on a Leica is purely physical: they wouldn't reach infinity focus without extra glass in the adapter. Leica lens to Nikon body works though. The rest probably has to do with reputation and relative cost.

 

[Marcelo Paniagua]

I don't have an opinion about the original question. They seem like rather different cameras so I'm not sure why they would be directly compared. The Leica R flange-focal distance is 47mm and the Nikon F mount is 46.5mm. So one reason you don't hear about people converting Nikon lenses to mount on a Leica is purely physical: they wouldn't reach infinity focus without extra glass in the adapter. Leica lens to Nikon body works though. The rest probably has to do with reputation and relative cost.

I can't argue with that flawless logic

 

[Huss]

Then why not mention the Phoenix P-5000?

View attachment 304743

That thing is gorgeous! I love how that seam that goes all the across looks like you can peal the top of the camera off! And that font design! Wow. Amazing.

I had a Zenit 212K and posted pics of it next to my R8 just to annoy the stick up their.. Leica crowd. The Zenit 212 actually was released several years before the Leica R8 so who copied whom?

 

[Paul Howell]

In terms of repairablity how about a 1st or 2nd generation SL, all mechanical, not too expensive, you can 2, one for parts. Or, a Swiss Alpa, maybe a 10 or 9, lens are as good as Leica or Nikon, most expensive is the Kern Swiss 50 1.7 Macro.

 

[Patrick Robert James]

If I was spending my money I'd buy the Nikon, but I'd prefer an older FE or FE2. Can't remember which one anymore but I always thought that was the best manual Nikon body. The match needle meter was a perfect way to get that meter information.

If I were spending your money I'd buy the Leica.

I've thought about buying a Leica over the years. Some of the cameras aren't even that expensive, but the lenses are obscene. I just don't think they are worth it with the other options out there.

 

[hap]

I have an FE....it has better than a match needle. It has an analog needle for shutter speed and window for aperture. It will take all lenses from 1959 . FE2 will not . FE2 sucks more juice. FE has a battery gauge that lets you know several weeks prior to dying. better power switch. FE has on 1/2000s FE21/4000s. Big deal. FE Batteries can live for years.

 

[hap]

FM mechanical shutter 1/1000s. battery only for meter. LED readout. mounts all lenses back to genesis.

If you have to...buy leica R lenses and use Leitax integrated adapter to any Nikon body.

 

[mshchem]

F3

 

[hap]

True...I have F3HP. It's quite beautiful and the view finder is the best. Manual focus is a breeze. I can use my AF lenses on it in manual .