Is the FM3 shutter as tinny-sounding as an FE?

[Frank Petronio]

I recently shot a roll through a nice vintage FE and as shocked at how tinny the shutter sounded after using a Leica. Felt like a big shake passed through my hands with the mirror too. Brrrr...

Is the FM3 any better than the FE/FM/FE2/FM2 in this regard?

 

[Keith]

Typical Copal shutter sound ... what do you expect? 😛

Find me a Leica that has 1/4000 sec available from a non electronic shutter! 😀

 

[dfoo]

I have both the FM2 and an FE and compared with my Leica's and my ZM the shutters sound like a shotgun. Its like a snick vs a CLACK!

 

[Frank Petronio]

Well the F3 is smoother, I swore this was shaking the pictures but they were fine.

 

[newspaperguy]

Quiet?

Just tried my FE-vs-OM-1n.

Olympus wins the hush race by a landslide.

 

[dfoo]

They definitely take great pictures. Those old nikon MF lenses are great. I have a 50/1.4, 24/2.8 and the 105/2.5. Great lenses all of them. I find, however, that I cannot focus as accurately with the SLR, nor can I hand hold the camera as steady at low shutter speeds when compared with the RF cameras I own.

 

[fbf]

No, the fm3a is no better. However, i do find the f3(hp) to be steadier comparing to the fm2n, fe2 i have used.
I still use them because i sometimes need to shoot very closely and I can't do it easily with leica M.

 

[FrankS]

The vertical, metal copal shutter usually has the advantage of faster top speed and higher sync speed, but I seem to like slr's with horizontal running shutters as in my F, F3, OM1 and 4, MX, RTS, X-570.

 

[Frank Petronio]

Back 86-92 I shot thousands of rolls doing corporate work w my FM-2s but after nearly 20 years away I guess I got spoiled by the Leicas, Hexars, and even the F3s and Leica SLs I had post FM-FE. Dang how did we ever make pictures with that ancient junk?

So you guys blow $6-800 on FM-3s ehh? Interesting....

 

[Rob-F]

I can tell you what is quieter than the FE, FE2, and FM series. They are not stealth cameras! The FA is quieter. You feel a lot less vibration going through the camera, as well. A lot of the difference is actually in the FA's reduced mirror slap. I haven't tried mine yet in low-light conditions, but I feel confident that if I ever need to, I'll be able to use lower shutter speeds than with my FE2s. I'd say my F100 has an even smoother mirror and shutter, and the FA is second only to the F100. Of course, the F100 is a different animal from an FA, which is again different from the FM.

 

[rbsinto]

What does it matter whether the shutter sounds like flapping butterfly wings or rhino farts in a steel culvert pipe?
For me It's only the images that count in the final analysis. There couldn't possibly be a louder camera than either my motorized F or motorized F2, and I do just fine with either of them.

 

[Keith]

Now and then I fire the shutter on my 500CM and it puts everything else into perspective! 😀

 

[dfoo]

The good news when using the FE/FM2 is that you'll get lots of eye contact in your shots. Everyone will be looking in your direction, wondering the source of the gunshot!

 

[kshapero]

Back 86-92 I shot thousands of rolls doing corporate work w my FM-2s but after nearly 20 years away I guess I got spoiled by the Leicas, Hexars, and even the F3s and Leica SLs I had post FM-FE. Dang how did we ever make pictures with that ancient junk?

So you guys blow $6-800 on FM-3s ehh? Interesting....

My FM3a was $325, works like a charm.

 

[Keith]

My FM3a was $325, works like a charm.

Mine was just over three hundred also ... where the hell does Frank shop? 😛

 

[dfoo]

If you want Frank, I'd sell you one of mine for $500 😀

 

[Frank Petronio]

No thanks, I'll just settle for a $150 F3hp ;-) or maybe pick up a $170 F100.

Damn all this stuff used to be so expensive.

 

[amateriat]

What does it matter whether the shutter sounds like flapping butterfly wings or rhino farts in a steel culver pipe?
For me It's only the images that count in the final analysis. There couldn't possibly be a louder camera than either my motorized F or motorized F2, and I do just fine with either of them.

Fine enough, but one of the reasons I moved to RFs was the noisy escapement of mirror box + shutter (and, for me, anyway, the whole menu-submenu thing, which is why dSLRs got scratched from my list rather quickly).

The noisy-shutter thing was/is a hangdog for mechanical-shuttered CV bodies as well, since they utilize two shutters for the sake of reducing light leaks (the non-electronic Copals used weren't designed with no-mirror RFs in mind). The RFs utilizing AE (Contax G series, Hasselblad/Fuji XPan, Bessa A-series, and my beloved Hexar RFs) use the single-shutter Copal, which is generally more quiet; the Nikon FM3a probably uses the same shutter as these, but you still have all the mirror-box hardware along for the ride. If the camera back is of relatively thin construction, it's probably not dampening the noise the way the back on an F-series camera might.


- Barrett

 

[italy74]

No idea for FE or else, but for sure FM3a is really a CLACK / TLACK, kind of cannon recoil (much louder and less muffled/dampened) compared to F6 or D700.

 

[Rob-F]

No thanks, I'll just settle for a $150 F3hp ;-) or maybe pick up a $170 F100.

Damn all this stuff used to be so expensive.

If you don't like the sound of the FE, you won't like the F3! My FE2 always sounded a little tinny to me, too. But I had an F3hp for a while; and while the FE may sound tinny, the F3 sounds like a roofer's staple gun! (Well, not exactly, but it's very loud and machine-like.) I feel that the F3 has a lot more mirror slap than the FE/FE2. The FE/2 is tinny, but the mirror action is very fast, seemingly faster than an eyeblink, so one's vision is not interrupted for much longer than the blink of an eye. I've had trouble adjusting to the leisurely ker-chunk of my Leica R cameras after using my FE2s.

For me, the only significant improvements, in a film body, over the FE series, are the FA and the F100. In the digital realm, my D200 has a very soft and smooth shutter/mirror action. It makes sense, since the mirror is smaller and therefore has less mass.