I very much prefer the match needle over the led meter... it's a much quicker read, as it tells you the correct exposure, not just if your over or under.
Originally Posted by CGW
As for the led being more readable in low-light, that only really matters if your shooting long exposures with a tripod. In light bright enough to shoot hand-held, the match-needle meter is very readable.
The FM2 costs nearly twice as much on the used market compared to an FE2, not really worth it IMO.
Both are good cameras - it's hard to go wrong. Whether the FE2 or FM2 fits you better depends on whether you value the near immunity from batteries with the latter or the aperture-priority automation of the former. Both take the same motor drive and indeed the same batteries (the FM2 needs them only to power the light meter).
Frankly, though, I'm tempted to recommend to you to get an F3HP instead. They're not very costly - a hundred dollars or so will buy you a nice user - and share many features of the FE2. The maximum shutter speed may only be 1/2000 instead of 1/4000 but one seldom needs the latter. The flash sync speed of 1/90 rather than 1/250 can be significant for some (I rarely use flash). The advantage of it, however, is that it's a professional camera - with that beautiful build quality and heft that you sound like you're wanting. The shutter is rated for about three times as much shooting as the FM/FE-series cameras (although many used examples will be former pro cameras and might have some miles on them).
I use my F3HP more than my FEs or my FM2n. I like it better, despite its limitations.
Jim MacKenzie - Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada
A bunch of Nikons; Feds, Zorkis and a Kiev; Pentax 67-II (inherited from my deceased father-in-law); Bronica SQ-A; and a nice Shen Hao 4x5 field camera with 3 decent lenses that needs to be taken outside more. Oh, and as of mid-2012, one of those bodies we don't talk about here.
Favourite film: do I need to pick only one?
That's probably one of the most sensible things I've ever read on APUG (no offence or anything, but I mean - face it, we're analog photography enthusiasts - we love doing everything ass backwards).
Originally Posted by djacobox372
I honestly think it's going to be one of those cameras that I'll actually have some practical use for (kind of like my fifties folding camera - awesome for shooting medium format since it's only a portion of the size of my bulky 645 system camera) - and when you're buying analog and used, the price should be right, I mean, no point in spending loads of money just because it's some collectors item like a Leica, Hasselblad or an FM2.
Not to distract from the question at hand too much, but F and F2 pro bodies are selling for peanuts these days, as are the amateur-level Nikkormats, and as are the pre-AI lenses that go on these cameras only. I have a kit consisting of a silver F Photomic T, a black F Photomic FTn, a Nikkormat FTN, a 24mm 2.8, 35mm f/2, 50mm f/1.4, and 135mm f/3.5, two lens cases, two Nikon filters, and Nikon F cable release, and I have spent under $600 for all of this. This is an insane price for pro-level Nikon equipment. At these prices, it is hard for me to recommend anything but an F or F2.
Last edited by 2F/2F; 11-10-2010 at 06:29 PM. Click to view previous post history.
"Truth and love are my law and worship. Form and conscience are my manifestation and guide. Nature and peace are my shelter and companions. Order is my attitude. Beauty and perfection are my attack."
- Rob Tyner (1944 - 1991)
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Buy both if possible ;-) I had my FM2 as a kind of a backup to an FE2. Frankly I really enjoyed the AE and the needle v LED's. That said, I have had issues with FE2 electronics and firmly believe the FM2 to be the overall more reliable camera. Here is Australia until (surprisingly) recently, they were the camera of choice by most of the Antarctic Division and Police Dept. Classic bombproof camera. Ideally the F3A is the way to go of course ;-)... best of both worlds.
Either one is fine.
Opinions are like other portions of the anatomy. I like the FM2n, so there!
KEH has both of them starting for less than $100 in BGN condition, so $$$ shouldn't really be a consideration.
I have an FE and love it. The match-needle is great, outside of low-light situations. But I'd love an FM as well. Or an F, or F2, or F3... Despite having an FE, I like not having to rely on batteries with my Yashica Mat so I'll probably opt for a full mechanical body the next go around. I'll definitely keep the FE though. The FE and 50 Series E can be slid into a jacket pocket, making it too convenient to be without.
Get the FM2, it can work with no batteries if you were out in the desert in Afghanistan. Come to think of it it's what Steve McCurry used to get the Afghan Girl shot . . . ;-)
Get the FE2 as it has aperture priority and TTL flash.
Of course the best solution is to get the FM3A as all shutter speeds are available without batteries like the FM2. With batteries it has TTL flash, aperture priority and meter needle like the FE2. It is newer than both by a significant number of years as it was introduced in 2001 and should therefore last that much longer as it was built like the FM2 and FE2 in quality.
But if you do get the FM2 or FE2, consider getting the FM3A's K3 split image focusing screen as it never blacks out!
BTW, not only do you have to have extra batteries with you, but a nickel size coin too!
How is the build quality and materials used in the FM3A?
I mean, it's such a new camera, considering the development of mass production and design, that pretty much signifies that they might have turned to cheaper materials - does it have the same metal body that the older models use?
Anyway, it's going to be the FE2 for now, since that's the one I'll be getting for a decent enough price (something around 85 bucks - which is a good price considering I live in one of the most expensive cities in the world).
Just kind of curious as to how it is compared to the other cameras according to your experiences here - from what I see here, there doesn't really seem to be a bad model among the classical Nikons.