Things to be careful about before buying a Nikon Fe (or any camera)?

[allohse]

So... is it a fair price? I wanted something I could use for the next few years, so idk, will the camera rust or die on me? I already have a very plastic-y pentax here, but I don't trust it.

 

[BrianShaw]

So... is it a fair price? I wanted something I could use for the next few years, so idk, will the camera rust or die on me? I already have a very plastic-y pentax here, but I don't trust it.

Seems like a fair price. Is it a price that you won’t mind paying? Do you want that camera? Do you have Nikkor lenses, or need to get some?

Old cameras often show their age and past use. While that one has been well used it doesn’t appear to have been abused. I seem to have a different assessment than others, but to me that all looks superficial. I would not have any fear or trepidation about it. I’d buy it at that price.

Years ago I was given a FE that was “broken” and transported for weeks in the bottom of a baseball bat bag. After a good dusting off, new battery, and replacement of the eyepiece it became a favorite of mine. Over the years it needed a couple of minor repairs… but that’s not unusual for old cameras.

Best wishes in whatever you choose to do.

 

[Huss]

.. I already have a very plastic-y pentax here, but I don't trust it.

Has it failed on you?

 

[Chan Tran]

Well, converting to dollars it would be about $120, without lens. Cameras are generally more expensive here though. The (kind of battered) FM2 I was talking about would cost about $250 (again, without the lens), although its been revised by someone I know knows his stuff. An almost new FM2 for sale on a specialized shop goes for about $400.

Others cameras I found similar in price to the FE (some already with lenses) are all older mechanical ones, that use 1,3V mercury batteries on the light meter (minolta srt101, olympus om1, nikkormat, etc). I guess I could be patient and wait for a Pentax k1000 with lenses to appear (or some other nikon camera similar to the FE), but I already have two nikon lenses here (a nikkor 50mm and a cheap telephoto zoom lenses, which i've been told is decent at 70mm) so the lenses are not really a concern. Although I would like to get a 35mm nikkor lens someday (at least $200, I think).

The seller seems like a nice enough guy, and he already sells a lot photography equipment. And the camera seems to be working fine...

Anyway, If I do get the FE, any tips on not making the rusty surfaces any worse? I’m guessing it’s not something I can just get rid of.

Why don't you consider an FM? It's even less expensive than the FE.

 

[allohse]

Why don't you consider an FM? It's even less expensive than the FE.

I just didn't find any? I'm mostly looking at camera shops (that I trust) instead of trying to buy from people. I'm sure it's going to appear eventually.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

So, I've been trying for the last few weeks to buy a camera. I've settled on this (very cheap) Nikon FE. It's very similar to the FM2 I also found for sale and way cheaper. Although I do have some misgivings about it not being totally mechanical, it seems like the best option between the two.
looks like a beater to me;stay away from it or ask for the right to return within a reasonable time.
Problem is, I'm not buying it from a specialized shop. So I thought about coming here and asking you guys: what should I be looking out for? The guy who's selling it to me send me a video of the light meter working (ISO 100 - 1/125s, f8, on a sunny day, half shadow, half light being framed - according to him). But should I be careful about anything else? I've also asked for pictures of the mirror, and it seems OK, but I'm not sure I can actually tell.

There're also some small spots of rust, how should I go about getting rid of them? (or just making sure they don't get worse)

I’ll attach all relevant pictures bellow. (well, there're a lot of them, but please bear with me)

As always, thank you!

 

[John Koehrer]

Camera's pointed at white curtains, sort of bright to me. If the meter's reading ~1/20 @ f8 ISO 100 in real life I'd expect f8 around 60 or higher.

But it's pretty hard to judge from looking at a monitor.

 

[allohse]

What exactly do you mean by a "beater"?

 

[jimgalli]

If you're this concerned about camera perfection I doubt you'll ever actually take a picture, so . . . .

 

[allohse]

geez

 

[Don_ih]

If you're this concerned about camera perfection I doubt you'll ever actually take a picture, so . . . .

geez

What @jimgalli means is that this is too much dithering about nothing. If the camera works, it can be used. That camera looks perfectly fine. If you won't miss the money you spend on it, get it and use it. Pristine cameras are for collectors. I have cameras that look way more beat up than that that work perfectly well.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

I just didn't find any? I'm mostly looking at camera shops (that I trust) instead of trying to buy from people. I'm sure it's going to appear eventually.

the automatic exposure of theFE is a real convenience over theFM!

 

[flavio81]

Always a possibly, cameras with electronic shutters can die at any time without or with any corrosion, just the nature of the beast. Otherwise a good clean lube and adjust is always a good investment.

Replace "die" with "fail, needing maintenance afterwards". In my experience every electronically-controlled camera of those years will need a preventive manteinance. And afterwards it will be a very reliable machine.

 

[flavio81]

I did read somewhere that the 1/90s speed is completely mechanical. Would the camera then keep working even if the electronics stop? I'm guessing it can work without batteries from that speed. (not that I want to think about it happening!!)

Yes.

And you see, when this camera fails is mostly due to mechanical issues that are also the same for the FM, and then sometimes by some electrical (not electronical) issues.

 

[flavio81]

Just to expand your options, the mechanical version equivalent of the FE - spec wise, is the FM and not the relatively more expensive FM2. Also spec wise, the relatively less pricey Nikkormat FT3 is the equivalent of the FM.

To expand on what LesDMess has told you,

If you want a "fully mechanical" machine then skip the FM and check out the Nikkormat FTN/FT2/FT3.

Otherwise, between FM and FE, the FE was the higher-priced model, with interchangeable screens, it was also designed later, and has (imo) a better display for speeds.

 

[BrianShaw]

If you want a "fully mechanical" machine then skip the FM and check out the Nikkormat FTN/FT2/FT3.

I can vouch for that. Many years ago I did research in underground mines, using photography for data gathering and documentation. We used FT3's and they never failed us. Built like the proverbial brick outhouse.

The FMs... okay but proved to be less robust in those really challenging environments. Perhaps that doesn't matter so much for general hobby photography, though.

 

[snusmumriken]

My FE looked very much like that by the time I sold it, but was still functioning like new. It had been through about 15 years of respectful but tough use documenting my work in outdoor field conditions including the arctic. However, I had grown to dislike the camera by the end. If I had known more about competing brands at the time of purchase, I would have bought an OM-1, or possibly a Canon AE1.

For me, interchangeable viewfinder screens was an attractive selling point in the FE (because I used telephoto lenses including mirror lenses), but replacing the standard screen with ground-glass made the viewfinder gloomy as hell. It was also by far the noisiest camera I have owned. The idea of buying a small camera that was adaptable and fully compatible with the grown-up Nikon system was also attractive, but I could never afford to take much advantage of it.

 

[allohse]

And so, the plot thickens: I found a pentax k-1000 for the same price, with a 50mm lens. Seeing I also have a pentax zoom lens here, I would have (as with the Fe) two options of lenses. It's been revised, oiled and cleaned.

Comparing the two cameras, which one do you guys find more reliable/better? I tend to lean towards nikon cameras because it's my father's favorite brand and I've been hearing him stolling the qualities of his Nikon F for most of my life, but I have no real notion of how different brands perform in relation to each other.

 

[BrianShaw]

Somewhat apples and oranges. If you will be making use of automatic mode, choose the FE. For manual mode, either will do. The FE meter is center-weighted, which is better than the K1000 meter. But both are competent cameras. It’s not so much a matter of how the cameras will perform but more about how the photographer will perform with the camera. Both will take fine pictures. I’ve used both and much prefer the FE.

 

[Don_ih]

which one do you guys find more reliable/better?

If they both work, they're pretty much identical in terms of results. Your preference is what matters. The one you like to use is the best one for you. No one here can tell you that.

There are only subtle differences between all good-quality manual SLRs. Buy the one that's most likely to keep working longer.

 

[Huss]

The K1000 was Pentax's bottom of the barrel SLR at the time it was released. The FE was a pro-am level camera when it was released.
If they both are working correctly then I'd take the FE 100% of the time.

 

[flavio81]

And so, the plot thickens: I found a pentax k-1000 for the same price, with a 50mm lens. Seeing I also have a pentax zoom lens here, I would have (as with the Fe) two options of lenses. It's been revised, oiled and cleaned.

Comparing the two cameras, which one do you guys find more reliable/better? .

I would pick the FE.

Now, if that pentax was a KM, KX, K2, or MX... i would be thinking it more carefully...