What was the Nikon equivalent to the Canon AE-1 in the day...?

Forum statistics

Threads
199,365
Messages
2,790,430
Members
99,886
Latest member
Squiggs32
Recent bookmarks
0

miha

Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2007
Messages
2,996
Location
Slovenia
Format
Multi Format
Nikon EM and FG.
 

gone

Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2009
Messages
5,504
Location
gone
Format
Medium Format
Right. The EM and FG were amateur cameras all the way (and a heck of a lot smaller than the AE-1 cameras). My memory says they were specifically designed for woman amateur photogs, hence their diminutive size. I have both. My favorite is the EM. Even though it's very limited in controls, being basically just a P & S SLR w/ one button for back lit subjects, it's so much fun to shoot. Just focus and fire away. If you shoot Tri-X and develop in D76 you'll be "close enough" 99% of the time. Before I had to sell it, my favorite lens on the EM was a Leica R 90 Elmarit w/ an R to Nikon adapter. A $20 camera w/ a $400 lens. Worked a treat!

I suspect that Nikon figured the FGs were cutting into their "real" camera sales, so they quickly stopped making them.
 

miha

Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2007
Messages
2,996
Location
Slovenia
Format
Multi Format

benjiboy

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 18, 2005
Messages
11,977
Location
U.K.
Format
35mm
When the Canon AE1 came out IMO Nikon didn't make a directly equivalent camera, any more than they made an equivalent to the Canon EF or T90.
 

fstop

Member
Joined
Apr 4, 2011
Messages
1,121
Format
35mm
Not true at all. The FE(2) was build for pros looking for a second camera or advanced amateurs, see specs they are very different to the AE-1.


+1

the FE-2 is at a much higher level of technology, higher shutter speeds, true AP operation,titanium or al. shutter instead of cloth,no to mention other features the AE-1 doesn't have.
 

macfred

Subscriber
Joined
Nov 6, 2014
Messages
3,839
Location
Germany
Format
Multi Format
Alright gentlemen, I give in to the majority ! And yes, the FE2 was the better camera.
My thought : Who ever was interested in a Canon AE-1, didn't regard the EM as an alternative solution to buy.
Please don't mind my poor english.
 

fotch

Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2005
Messages
4,774
Location
SE WI- USA
Format
Multi Format
If I recall, the Nikon FE was priced closer to the AE-1, just slightly higher. The FG was a less expensive camera. Pro's, real professional photographers, needed the extra ruggedness and reliability of the F2 or F3. If your income depended on your tools, you get the best.
 

Chan Tran

Subscriber
Joined
May 10, 2006
Messages
6,872
Location
Sachse, TX
Format
35mm
If I recall, the Nikon FE was priced closer to the AE-1, just slightly higher. The FG was a less expensive camera. Pro's, real professional photographers, needed the extra ruggedness and reliability of the F2 or F3. If your income depended on your tools, you get the best.

I remember differently! I remember that the FE price was much higher than that of the Canon AE-1 although really as far as features it's not much more. The FE is an A and M mode camera while the AE-1 was the Tv and M mode. In fact the AE-1 was the least expensive 35mm SLR that offer AE. It's the reason why it's so popular, it offered the best bang for the bucks at least by specs only.
 

miha

Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2007
Messages
2,996
Location
Slovenia
Format
Multi Format
Pop Photography from 1981, list prices from Adorama, BH, etc: around USD 190 for the Canon AE-1 and USD 240 for the Nikon FE. Quite a difference I say. The EM was cheaper, around 180 w50/1.8.
 

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
53,360
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format
The AE-1 was a game changer for the industry. As was the Olympus OM-1.

The cameras that were introduced in response to each of them tended to be considerably different than the models that were current before them.
 

andrew.roos

Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2011
Messages
572
Location
Durban, Sout
Format
35mm
The Nikon EM was the direct competition for the AE-1. They were on sale at the same time (although the EM was introduced in 1979, 3 years after the AE-1). Both used cheaper materials is place of all-metal construction and cheaper internal construction (although the EM has proved fairly durable, nonetheless). Both featured automatic exposure - shutter priority for the AE-1, aperture priority for the EM. The EM did not, however, include manual exposure (which the AE-1 has), although this was remedied by the FG that replaced it in 1982 (and which competed with the AE-1 Program). Both use MF lenses.
 

Alan Gales

Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
3,253
Location
St. Louis, M
Format
Large Format
The FE was compared to the AE-1 back in the day.

The FE and later FE-2 were not considered pro cameras although a lot of pros used them. The Nikon pro cameras were the F2 and F3.

When Nikon introduced the EM and FG they were considered entry level cameras. I used to sell both of them new.

Yes, Nikon bodies were expensive in the day. I paid less for my Contax 139 than an FE-2 body but the Zeiss lenses cost more than the Nikkors. Zeiss, Leitz and Nikkor were all expensive compared to Canon and other brand lenses.
 

miha

Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2007
Messages
2,996
Location
Slovenia
Format
Multi Format
It was in 1982, when I (very clueless) was looking for my first 35mm SLR.
There were the AE-1, the FE and the EM approachable - finaly I bought a FM (still in use) …:whistling:

Wise move :wink: I had a couple of FM2s as my main cameras in the late 90s till about 2007 when I moved to another 35 system. They are indestructible.
 
OP
OP
Richard S. (rich815)
Joined
Jan 14, 2003
Messages
4,924
Location
San Francisco
Format
Multi Format
Geez, ask a simple question! Interesting discussion nonetheless. A few years ago someone gave me an AE-1. Since I was Nikon and Contax and had no Canon lens I never used it and gave it to a friend who had an A-1. I now do have an F-1 and a couple of Canon FD lenses and was wondering which of my Nikons (F2, F3, FE2, FM2) most resembled the AE-1.....
 

macfred

Subscriber
Joined
Nov 6, 2014
Messages
3,839
Location
Germany
Format
Multi Format
Wise move :wink: ...

To bring a little color to the discussion -
young macfred in the early eighties ( self portrait with the Nikon FM) :wink:

attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • img444.jpg
    img444.jpg
    183.9 KB · Views: 1,422

f/16

Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2011
Messages
375
Location
Houston, TX
Format
Multi Format
I wouldn't call the EM an AE-1 equivilant because the EM did not have manual override on the shutter speeds. And the FE2 came out several years after the AE-1. So I'd have to say the FE would be the closest in years produced and in features.
 

miha

Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2007
Messages
2,996
Location
Slovenia
Format
Multi Format
To bring a little color to the discussion -
young macfred in the early eighties ( self portrait with the Nikon FM) :wink:

Lovely light, great portrait.
 
Joined
Mar 31, 2012
Messages
2,408
Location
London, UK
Format
35mm
Before 1977, the only Nikon cameras in existence were the F2, the Nikkormats FT3 and ELW.

That would have been the Nikkormat FT2, not the FT3.
The Nikkormat FT3 was introduced in March 77, 2 months before the EL2 and at the same time as the F2A and F2AS.

The Nikon FM was introduced late 77 and the FE in 78.

and cheaper internal construction (although the EM has proved fairly durable, nonetheless)

That is true. But, the internal frame was built with the same metal as the F3.
The new engineered plastics on the outside were only used on the top cover, bottom plate and the front fascia with the Nikon name. Everything else was metal, including the back door.

The EM was a direct answer to the Pentax ME of 1976 (and later MV and MV1, although these models were even simpler than the EM) and competed with the Olympus OM10 of 1978.
The FG was launched the same year as the Pentax ME Super and a year or so after the Canon AE-1 Program.

Nikon never fully answered the Canon AE-1.
The closest in the late 70s was the FE. As both stand for the smaller and lighter bodies trend and as an answer to Olympus small OM series, then the FE is the closest to the AE-1 albeit targeting a slightly different market segment.

BTW, the FE and FM also incorporated some more plastic materials, including the front plate with the Nikon name.
Bet some of you though they were all metal. See this quote from Nikon Japan:

The Nikon FM and FE had used engineering plastics on the apron and name plate.
With the EM, the top and bottom cover were also made of plastic, thereby reducing the cost and complication of making these parts.
 
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom