Question. Minolta XD-11 or Minolta FM2N.

[Vsanzbajo]

I have a Minolta XD-11. A friend of mine found out that I was into film, so he has a Nikon FM2N mint. Is there a big difference between the XD11 and the Nikon. Is it worth it to get it?
Which one would you go with, any big differences?
Thanks in advance.

 

[Ralph Javins]

Good morning;

This is one of those questions where there is no really wrong answer. Both of those cameras are good, although in the Nikon line I still prefer the older F2. The XD-11 is one of the three cameras that are the subject of argument among Minolta owners over which one was the best Minolta produced; the XK/XK-M, the XD-11, or the Dynax 9/Maxxum 9.

Probably the best determining factor in your case is the number of lenses and other accessories you have for the XD-11 already, and how much you would need to pay for equivalent accessories for the Nikon FM2n. The lens quality for both is basically a horse race.

By the way, check the title of your message posting.

 

[Rol_Lei Nut]

Also agree with the previous post: IMHO it depends mainly on which lenses you want to use with it.

Arguably, the Nikon might be somewhat more indestructable and will work without batteries, but the Minolta's reliability shouldn't be a problem (my own experience is with a Leica R4, a modified DX-11).

Generally speaking, you won't notice any difference in the results using one camera or another (though lens choice will make adifference)...

 

[fstop]

There is a big difference between a FM2 and an XD-11, for starters the XD-11 is a multi mode camera where the FM2 is a manual camera. Both are good cameras.
A lot depends on your preference, do you want some metering automation or want a totally manual camera?

The argument between the XD-11 and XK has been around forever, owning XDs and XKs I can offer this: the only thing the XK offers over the XD-11 is the top shutter speed is 1/2000th and has mirror lock up.
The interchangable finders doesn't mean much, neither will take a motor drive, the XD-11 will take a winder where the XK would have to be bought in the motor configuration.I'm not a fan of film burners, they are hard on winder mechanisms and waste film. So to me it doesn't matter.
I never have put the maxxums and the following bodies in the equation, they are in a different category altogether.

 

[nanntonaku]

bodies are the least of your worries, i would spend more time thinking about which lenses and films i would most like to shoot with.

having said that, try and get your hands on it and see if you like it.

with some camera's things just click ( bad pun intended) and with others, even though they have a gazillion more features, nothing feels right.

so just find a body/system that you're content with, then you can enjoy the neurosis that is debating the the difference between a 1.2 and a 1.1 lens

 

[Les Sarile]

bodies are the least of your worries, . . .
. . . so just find a body/system that you're content with

For some this may be simple

Of course, you have to try them all just to see which one clicks!

 

[fmajor]

Apples and Oranges. The XD-11 is, as mentioned, a very automated/programmable camera - reliant on batteries. A more realistic comparison btw Minolta and the FM2n would possibly be a Minolta XE7. I've several Minolta XD cameras and they're super smooth, but i prefer my Minolta SRT102/202 cameras by far.

Most important in a Minolta/Nikon comparison is the *look* of each makers lenses and how film responds to their characteristics - both have really superb examples and some real lemon's. For my taste, Minolta Rokkor lenses reign supreme as do the manual-focus Minolta camera bodies, but that's just me...

 

[nanntonaku]

For some this may be simple

Of course, you have to try them all just to see which one clicks!

haha, true,... perhaps i was just lucky with my xd,... one of the perks of living in a smallish town with not much choice

 

[elekm]

It depends if you want to travel the Nikon road or the Minolta road.

When the XD 11 was released, it was extraordinary, because it offered both aperture- and shutter-priority autoexposure, as well as full manual exposure. It's battery dependent.

The FM2N is a derivative of the FM, of course. Well made, very sturdy.

If it was up to me, I'd want to have both cameras.

 

[perkeleellinen]

I've had both these. The Minolta was my first 'real' camera (in the UK it was called the XD7) and the Nikon is what I shoot now. Availability of lenses is where the Nikon shines for me although I initially bought it as it had a reputation as a 'camera for life'. The Minolta has auto settings which are useful, the sync is slower and the top shutter speed is slower. Bar that, they're both well made cameras, if the FM2 is being offered really cheap or even free then get it. Otherwise, I don't think I'd bother unless there's a lens that Nikon makes which Minolta doesn't or if you love shooting at 1/4000 to achieve great 'bokeh'.

 

[2F/2F]

The XD-11 is one of the best all-around 35mm cameras ever made, IMO. By comparison, the FM2N is not as "good," though it is also a fine camera and can get the job done perfectly well.

The bottom line would be that I wouldn't get the FM2N, unless it was cheap or free, and I wanted an inexpensive and serviceable platform for excellent Nikon lenses which just happened to be falling my way for cheap.

What I would do if I wanted a backup/second body is to look for an XE-7.

 

[fstop]

I don't weigh the battery argument when is comes to considering cameras. Like 98% of the people shooting pictures: I'll always have batteries available to me.
I'll never be in the middle of Botswana or on the north east ridge of K2 to worry about it.

 

[68degrees]

bodies are the least of your worries, i would spend more time thinking about which lenses and films i would most like to shoot with.

having said that, try and get your hands on it and see if you like it.

with some camera's things just click ( bad pun intended) and with others, even though they have a gazillion more features, nothing feels right.

so just find a body/system that you're content with, then you can enjoy the neurosis that is debating the the difference between a 1.2 and a 1.1 lens

+1 for neurosis. Thats what I have I think. GAIN Gear Acquisition Induced Neurosis. .. Man I love this website. ... hahaha

 

[flavio81]

Which one would you go with, any big differences?
.

Biggest differences are that one takes Minolta lenses, the other, Nikon lenses.

Both are fine cameras, plan which lens system do you want to use (N or M) and decide camera on that.

 

[halfaman]

Have both, keep only the Nikon FM2N. For me the main difference was the shutter, more advance technologically compared to Minolta XD-11. Both have good lenses, I like a bit more the contrast of Nikkor AI-S.

 

[jerrybro]

I moved from the XD to the FM years ago. With good optics from either brand the results will be hard to tell apart, if at all. I found the size and handling of the FM fit my hand better than the XD. The XD was shorter and my hand would cramp up after a lot of shooting. I also found the viewfinder size better with the FM.

 

[68degrees]

I was thinking today that in a way the FM has both aperture and shutter priority, almost. Pick an aperture and then move the shutter dial until the middle led lights up. Very quick and easy to do. or set the shutter and move the aperture ring. For exposure comp you can + or minus 3 stops with LEDs . Its pretty nice actually. Only thing its missing is metered low light automatic exposure when exposure requires more than 1 second. I dont think the XD-11 does this. At least not my copy. NO matter how dark it is it wont automatically expose longer than about 5 seconds which is sad because that is one feature I really like on the FE and EL2. Unless I just need a CLA on my XD-11,

 

[Uncle Bill]

I own both an XD-11 and a FM2n, the only thing in common is similar size and shape and they use a vertical copal shutter. Which one is better, that's much more subjective, short answer, I like both cameras.

 

[Jon Buffington]

I also have both Both are fantastic, but different. Shooting from a tripod, I will choose the xd11 just because it is more feature rich and the viewfinder curtain thingamajig (forget the name).

 

[Chan Tran]

I have both but to pick one it would certainly be the FM2N. In fact I would pick the original FM over the XD-11.

 

[Les Sarile]

I have both but to pick one it would certainly be the FM2N. In fact I would pick the original FM over the XD-11.

The XD-11 is a smoother and quieter camera then any of the vertical shutter Nikon FM/FE/FA series cameras. It also has a slightly larger magnification viewfinder and it is sufficiently bright that you will not likely miss having user interchangeable screens.

 

[Chan Tran]

The XD-11 is a smoother and quieter camera then any of the vertical shutter Nikon FM/FE/FA series cameras. It also has a slightly larger magnification viewfinder and it is sufficiently bright that you will not likely miss having user interchangeable screens.

that's you. Me it's the FM. Each has his own preference. Just like I much rather have the Nikon F3 than one of your favorite Pentax LX.

 

[Les Sarile]

that's you. Me it's the FM. Each has his own preference. Just like I much rather have the Nikon F3 than one of your favorite Pentax LX.

I stated smoothness and sound levels - both scientifically quantifiable characteristics and not personal preferences.

Also, my preference for the LX over the F3 - or any other aperture priority capable camera ever made past or present, is also a scientifically quantifiable characteristic of being able to make the longest aperture priority autoexposure.

This doesn't mean I can't appreciate the F3 , , ,

 

[Pentode]

I own and use both. I’ve also owned, or currently own other Nikon & Minolta bodies.

With the XD-11 and the FM2n you happen to be comparing my personal favorite body from each maker. Both are excellent cameras and they are quite different, as others have already pointed out.

Ergonomics lead me to favor the Minolta, but only by a small margin. Both brands’ lenses are outstanding and, looking at a final print, you’d never be able to tell them apart.

From a purely practical standpoint there is one very considerable difference worth considering: parts are readily available for the Nikon and that’s just not the case with the Minolta. Sure, you can get them repaired, but it’s getting harder and harder to find someone to do it. Other than that it really just comes down to which camera you like to shoot with. They’re both great performers.

 

[Chan Tran]

I stated smoothness and sound levels - both scientifically quantifiable characteristics and not personal preferences.

Also, my preference for the LX over the F3 - or any other aperture priority capable camera ever made past or present, is also a scientifically quantifiable characteristic of being able to make the longest aperture priority autoexposure.

This doesn't mean I can't appreciate the F3 , , ,

I agree with you but I want loud shutter it's not scientific. Just preference.