Nikon FM3a vs Leica M7

John Koehrer · Feb 2, 2016

Shutter lag time doesn't include reflexes of the fuzzygrapher.
It's strictly a measurement of the delay between the button being pressed and the time the shutter opens.
I noticed the chart provided above was from 1953 and suspect the delay on an SLR has improved a little bit.
The Minolta XE-1, not exactly a pro camera has a lag time of 39ms, the Nikon F6 is 38. FWIW Canon
EOS 1n RS is a mighty quick 6ms.

nolanr66 · Feb 9, 2016

They just shoot film really. The Leica cost's a lot so unless you are busting a gut to have one then just forget it.

Huss · Feb 18, 2016

I shoot both Ms and SLRs. I have a bunch of the ones mentioned in this thread on both sides. I won't get into which one is 'better' because if you are impartial you can figure out which one is better for what purpose. It's not rocket science..
Right now I have a Nikkormat FT2 with me. Why? Cuz I just got it, never used one before, and it's fun. Just like all the others are fun too.

Frankly Unsharp · Feb 19, 2016

Hi, I've never owned an M7, only an M6 (sold it) and an M5 (still have it), and I have to say that the prices are still too high (new or used). Nice cameras, but...
You'd better put Your money on a Nikon FM3a (yes!, i have one of those!). You won't regret it!

Ai Print · Feb 19, 2016

atufte said:
My vote is the FM3A, this is a workhorse no matter what people here tell you...mine have been used for years in wartime Irak and Afganistan, and
is still in superb working condition...

Yep, I bought mine brand new from B&H for $525 in 2002, still use the snot out of it. In fact, in addition to being one of the most misunderstood cameras ever, it is my absolute favorite, and I have used an M7, own and use an M6TTL, M3, M240.

The meter in Auto is fantastic even in low light and then if the battery goes, you just keep on making images at all the shutter speeds you could ever want. The AEL lock and flash exposure comp button are great too, build is easily on par with any other camera I have ever used, mine has hit concrete and rocks several times.

In my opinion it blows away the FM2N....

Huss · Feb 19, 2016

I think the FE2 is more of an accurate comparison to the FM3a. The advantage the FM3a is that it can use all it's indicated shutter speeds with no batteries.
The advantage of the FE2 is that it has more manual shutter speeds - it goes down to 8 seconds instead of 1 second. The usability is pretty much identical, but the FE2 can be had for about 1/5 of the price.

Ai Print · Feb 19, 2016

Huss said:
I think the FE2 is more of an accurate comparison to the FM3a. The advantage the FM3a is that it can use all it's indicated shutter speeds with no batteries.

Yeah, well to a person like me who does a ton of cold weather and high elevation shooting, that is a ***HUGE*** advantage over the FE2. I think the FM3A is one of Nikon's best cameras ever, regardless of being digital or film.

You can find user condition FM3A's for $300, to me that makes it a much better value than an FM2N or FE2. I mean, I paid $525 for mine new, proceeded to earn thousands with it over the years and can turn around and sell it for $300??

FM3A, peerless foks....

Huss · Feb 19, 2016

Frankly Unsharp said:
Hi, I've never owned an M7, only an M6 (sold it) and an M5 (still have it), and I have to say that the prices are still too high (new or used). Nice cameras, but...
You'd better put Your money on a Nikon FM3a (yes!, i have one of those!). You won't regret it!

I bought a perfect high serial # M7 (so you get the latest finder and coatings) for $1500 (used of course). That is only a couple o hundred bux more than an M6TTL, so I think that is pretty good value in Leicaland. I would never drop $5K for a new one, because for me, I just don't see any added value. The moment I use it, it becomes my $1500 one..
'My' FM3a - my FE2 (!) - is fantastic (I prefer it to the F6) and only cost me $80 in perfect shape. I would never drop $400+ for an FM3a, because for me, I just don't see any added value.
What I really like about the FM3a is the spirit behind it. Nikon never had to make it, the market for those cameras had already passed. But they did as a final hurrah and to pay respect to what had been. Dammit, I'm now talking myself into an FM3A!

Huss · Feb 19, 2016

Ai Print said:
Yeah, well to a person like me who does a ton of cold weather and high elevation shooting, that is a ***HUGE*** advantage over the FE2..

Interesting, because then it would seem that the FM2 would be a much better choice for you. You would never have to worry about the mechanical shutter, and the batteries would last far longer than in the FM3a as they only power the meter. It would be like using an FM3A but with much better battery life. Unless you only use the FM3A in manual, and if you do that, then why not the FM2 for a fraction of the cost?
And I see from the photo that you have attached, that you are using it in manual mode. So, how is an FM3A in manual mode any different from using an FM2n given you do a ton of cold weather high elevation shooting?

Anyway, use what makes you happy. I'd certainly be happy to use an FM3a

DREW WILEY · Feb 19, 2016

I've known a number of expedition and extreme altitude climber types, and have done a lot of mtn photography myself. Batteries fail. If you can go completely mechanical, it's the best insurance there is of returning with the shots. A light meter can be kept in a pocket. I use mostly view cameras, obviously with mechanical leaf shutters; but my 35mm equivalents are also fully mechanical. I have both FM2n and FM3a, preferring the former for its greater simplicity. I had one friend whose treated himself to something fancier and way more expensive for the world's first alpine-style ascent of Kanchenjunga and had the camera fail completely, so went back to his dependable FM2 therefter. My nephew had shots of andean condors swirling around him underexpose during the first ascent of the face of Escudo, arguably the hardest technical climb in South America, so lost potential income from those shots, even though a number of others got published when the camera was briefly warm enough to "think". People need
to do the thinking instead. I've even come back from trips where the light meter failed due to getting dunked in icewater or whatever, and still got
my shots, even chromes spot on. That's called experience, and there is no alogorithm for that, or whatever nonsense they're marketing at the moment.

Huss · Feb 19, 2016

DREW WILEY said:
I've known a number of expedition and extreme altitude climber types, and have done a lot of mtn photography myself. Batteries fail. If you can go completely mechanical, it's the best insurance there is of returning with the shots. A light meter can be kept in a pocket. I use mostly view cameras, obviously with mechanical leaf shutters; but my 35mm equivalents are also fully mechanical. I have both FM2n and FM3a, preferring the former for its greater simplicity. I had one friend whose treated himself to something fancier and way more expensive for the world's first alpine-style ascent of Kanchenjunga and had the camera fail completely, so went back to his dependable FM2 therefter. My nephew had shots of andean condors swirling around him underexpose during the first ascent of the face of Escudo, arguably the hardest technical climb in South America, so lost potential income from those shots, even though a number of others got published when the camera was briefly warm enough to "think". People need
to do the thinking instead. I've even come back from trips where the light meter failed due to getting dunked in icewater or whatever, and still got
my shots, even chromes spot on. That's called experience, and there is no alogorithm for that, or whatever nonsense they're marketing at the moment.

Excellent comment. And why I do not use the 3d matrix metering on my F6. It is easily fooled in back lit conditions, even though it supposedly bases the exposure on what is in focus. IMO it's just marketing hype, as I can watch the exposure readings change on a static subject as I flip through the meter patterns on a back lit subject.
From way underexposed - matrix - to decent (heavy center weighted) - to correct (spot). That, the 100% battery dependency, the mass and the size makes me prefer the much more 'simple' offerings out there.

Ai Print · Feb 19, 2016

Huss said:
Interesting, because then it would seem that the FM2 would be a much better choice for you. You would never have to worry about the mechanical shutter, and the batteries would last far longer than in the FM3a as they only power the meter. It would be like using an FM3A but with much better battery life. Unless you only use the FM3A in manual, and if you do that, then why not the FM2 for a fraction of the cost?
And I see from the photo that you have attached, that you are using it in manual mode. So, how is an FM3A in manual mode any different from using an FM2n given you do a ton of cold weather high elevation shooting?

Because in a split second I can spin the dial to Auto and be in that mode. This is what is truly brilliant with the FM3A, stepless shutter speeds in auto, fully mechanical in manual. You are essentially getting the best parts of the FM2 and FE2 in one camera. While being able to dial in the shutter speeds of 2, 4 and 8 seconds on the FE2 is nice, losing that to gain a fully mechanical shutter on the FM3A is an easy trade. I have long learned to count off beyond one second, "One peanut butter, two peanut butter"...

When Nikon announced this camera, I about fell out of my chair as did a lot of Nat Geo shooters who worked in extreme conditions such as Thomas Ulrich, it is that brilliant of a camera. I ought to get another one, LOL!

Huss · Feb 19, 2016

Daniel, I just checked out your site. Those are some gorgeous photos!

Ai Print · Feb 19, 2016

DREW WILEY said:
I had one friend whose treated himself to something fancier and way more expensive for the world's first alpine-style ascent of Kanchenjunga and had the camera fail completely, so went back to his dependable FM2 therefter.

But what camera? In some 14 years of service, my FM3A has not even so much as hiccuped and has never been in for a CLA...

Huss said:
Daniel, I just checked out your site. Those are some gorgeous photos!

Thanks sir, it is a temp landing page, the real site will be up in a week or so.

DREW WILEY · Feb 19, 2016

I said expensive, implied battery dependent, automated (film camera), bells n' whistles. FM3a is just a slightly tweaked conclusion to the whole FM series, moderate priced, and will work without a battery. Even my first camera, an entry-level early Honeywell Pentax, went through utter hell in the
mountains before finally stripping a shutter speed gear. A good electromagnetic surge in a lightning storm could knock out many of the electronic
cameras. I won't comment on digital because they're in a different category, except to state that the average fifty buck old 35mm film camera in a
pawn shop is better built (physically) than most DLSR's. That's why they still work!

Dan Fromm · Feb 19, 2016

DREW WILEY said:
FM3a is just a slightly tweaked conclusion to the whole FM series, moderate priced, and will work without a battery.

Nikon thinks the FM3a is battery dependent. See http://imaging.nikon.com/history/chronicle/history-fm3a/

Were you thinking of the FM2n?

Pioneer · Feb 19, 2016

My K1000 provided many, many top notch hiking photographs for a long time. I recently had to send it in for some attention because I finally wore out the film advance gears (took over 30 years to do it.) Old, or new, large format field cameras are even more reliable. With the right aperture you can often take pictures without even using a shutter. I find digital cameras to be great fun but I certainly prefer older mechanical cameras in the back country.

But, since we seem to be comparing Leica and Nikon, then Leica also has a long and respected reputation for reliability under stressful environmental conditions. There are literally thousands of anecdotal accounts of people who had to default to their mechanical Leica because the "other" camera (including Nikon) quit working. Not even the M7 is completely electronic dependent. If you are not interested in the amazing accuracy of electronic shutters than go find a nice mechanical camera of almost any type and snap away.

Les Sarile · Feb 19, 2016

Dan Fromm said:
Nikon thinks the FM3a is battery dependent. See http://imaging.nikon.com/history/chronicle/history-fm3a/

Were you thinking of the FM2n?

I don't know what you read because it specifically states, "Many users were demanding both features, the convenience of aperture-priority AE and the reliability of mechanically controlled shutter operation without any battery. . ."

Is there really a need for either or these days . . .

Dan Fromm · Feb 19, 2016

Les, thanks for the correction. Drew, apologies for disagreeing with you and being wrong.

John_Nikon_F · Feb 20, 2016

Ai Print said:
Yeah, well to a person like me who does a ton of cold weather and high elevation shooting, that is a ***HUGE*** advantage over the FE2. I think the FM3A is one of Nikon's best cameras ever, regardless of being digital or film.

You can find user condition FM3A's for $300, to me that makes it a much better value than an FM2N or FE2. I mean, I paid $525 for mine new, proceeded to earn thousands with it over the years and can turn around and sell it for $300??

FM3A, peerless foks....

That said, you can get a good $150-$200 worth of film by buying a decently working FM2n, if you don't want one that looks minty. Decent black FM2n bodies seem to be going for $100-$150 at some of the local shops around here. If I want autoexposure, I grab my F3 or my F5. When I want to travel light and shoot with a mechanical body that has a meter, my FM2n gets used. Either that, or slightly heavier, my F2AS. If I don't want ANY batteries, then the F gets used.

nolanr66 · Feb 26, 2016

I probably will buy a FM2n sometime when one pops up on KEH. I usually buy the ex+ rating as it's a good camera when it gets here. I bought a bargain camera once and when it got here the dome was caved in and sent it back. I figure to skip bargain from now on. BHPhoto has a FM3A for $650.00 but I am the wrong fish to bite that bait. They also have a FG for $249.00. The FG is a nice light camera and fun to shoot but it's a $50.00 camera so I figure BHPhoto has lost their minds on used stuff. Anyway I want the FM2n because it's mechanical. The FM3A is a great camera also but I do not want another electronic camera. I know it has a mechanical mode but still it's filled with electronics that I do not want at the present time. It kind of boggles the mind how they squeezed 2 camera's inside the little body. Anyway the hunt is on for a FM2n. Plenty of them on ebay from Japan and other places but I do not have an ebay account and do not want to bother with it. With KEH if something is a bit wonky I can just send it back in a jiff and no harm done but a bit of shipping. I like the chrome so that usually helps a bit when looking.

Ai Print · Feb 27, 2016

nolanr66 said:
The FM3A is a great camera also but I do not want another electronic camera. I know it has a mechanical mode but still it's filled with electronics that I do not want at the present time. It kind of boggles the mind how they squeezed 2 camera's inside the little body.

This is what I mean by the FM3A possibly being the most misunderstood and underestimated camera ever....

It is not an electronic camera. If you take the battery out and use a handheld meter, just like you can an FM2, it will make photos longer than you will be alive, just like an FM2. However, if you put the battery in it, just like an FM2, it will now have a meter in manual mode, just like an FM2. But when you switch it to "A", it now has aperture priority with step-less shutter speeds, AE lock, TTL flash exposure compensation button, unlike an FM2. All the PCB boards are double sealed, the lubes used are with extreme cold in mind. It has better gearing, a better shutter and much better meter than either the FM2 or FE2, works incredibly good well into the minutes & even with using "A" over half the time, the battery just lasts forever.

And if for some reason decades from now, the little electronics it has in it do fail....it will keep right on making photos for the rest of your life. But they won't fail, because they made this camera for National Geographic photographers to take where batteries are hundreds of miles away, big cameras are a huge liability and getting the shot is a matter of life and death.

Trust me, I have used Nikon cameras to make possibly over a million photos in my 28 year career, the FM3A is the one to beat, everything you need and nothing you don't. It's the last camera I would ever get rid of, over all my nikons, my Leicas, Hasselblads, 4x5, etc.

$650 is a bit high, prices have come down now and I see them for around $400-$450, a total bargain when you consider what it is.

nolanr66 · Feb 27, 2016

Well the FM3A sounds fancy but It does not appeal to me. I guess I will just keep shooting my FG and keep my eye out for a FM2n. I have a F100 also that is a good performer. Kind of heavy sometimes.

Ai Print · Feb 27, 2016

nolanr66 said:
Well the FM3A sounds fancy but It does not appeal to me. I guess I will just keep shooting my FG and keep my eye out for a FM2n. I have a F100 also that is a good performer. Kind of heavy sometimes.

I use my F100 all the time along with my D750 and D810, great camera. But the FM3A is even better than that because of the focusing screen, so much so that I bought a new screen for it and modified the old one to put in the F100 to have an MF focusing aide. I paid $1,100 for my F100 in 2001, $525 for my FM3A in 2002 but yet the FM3A gets blasted or shunned by the amateur photographer bargain hunters because it has retained it's value ( for better or worse ) better than many Nikon bodies.

The funny thing is that the FM3A is actually not fancy at all, just functional. If it were in the $50-$200 price range that many folks on here seem to not want to spend more than on a used Nikon body, it would be heralded as the greatest thing ever.......says a lot about the enthusiast film crowd I guess.

Amateur photographers don't understand the FM3A and likely never will.

nolanr66 · Feb 27, 2016

I remember BHPhoto had F100's for about $1100.00 for a long time. Old new stock I think. Mine came from KEH in LN- about 6 years ago. I do not remember how much it cost but about $400.00 give a take. It's been a trouble free camera the entire time. I changed the Diopter is all. I actually owned a FM3A once. I bought it new and when I got it the door was floppy so I sent it back thinking I would buy it again after the refund. While I was waiting for the refund they announced they were not going to offer it and the available stock vanished. When I had the money for it again I could not find one to purchase. KEH does not have one for sale currently nor does it have a FM2n. They do not have much at all actually. Maybe the world is running out of camera's or they have low stock due to a lack of interest. I do not know but they have very little.

Anyway I totally understand what the FM3A is about but I just want the FM2n. If the FM2n needs anything Garry's camera can fix it, CLA with new light seals for $50.00. He will do the same thing for my FG only $45.00. I have sent him camera's before and they come back real nice. If my F100 gives it up sometime I am not going to fix it. However I am sure it has a long life ahead of it yet. The F100 is my last autofocus film camera. I do have an Olympus OMD EM5 which I use for video mostly and travel pictures as I do not want to hassle film at airports.

Nikon FM3a vs Leica M7

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency