Nikon F100 versus FM2/FE2

[rkm]

I've been shooting with an FE and an FM, which I love. I enjoy the process of using them, how small they are and the mechanical feel of them. Occasionally I toy with the idea of getting an FM2 or FE2, for the faster shutter speeds, and the apparently brighter viewfinder.

I like the look of black and white film (HP5) pushed to 800 or 1600, and faster shutter speeds would allow me to get smaller DOF on occasion. An FM2 or FE2 has 1/4000 compared to the 1/1000 on my cameras, but for similar money I could buy an F100, which has 1/8000. I only intend on using my manual focus AIS lenses, so perhaps it's overkill?

On the negative side, the F100 would feel huge by comparison I imagine, and would use up batteries far more frequently. However, I'm not looking to replace my cameras, so maybe a different photographic experience would be a good thing?

I'm wanting to know from those who have used these cameras, if the F100 was enjoyable to use... Do you like the viewfinder? Is the metering going to be any better with AIS lenses compared to and FM2?

 

[doolittle]

Have you considered an F4? It maintains full matrix metering with AIS lenses.
However if you are shooting black and white and not slide, it probably isn't such a big deal.

Or maybe invest in some ND filters to allow you to use larger apertures.

 

[kdemas]

I have an F100, FM2N and an FM3A, love them all. If you're going to use primarily manual focus lenses the FM or FE series are far better as you really need to use the focus confirmation light as a guide with the F100 (it simply doesn't visually snap into focus like the others, no split screen either).

All are terrific cameras. My personal fav is the FM3A.

Hope that helps!

Kent

 

[rkm]

Have you considered an F4? It maintains full matrix metering with AIS lenses.
However if you are shooting black and white and not slide, it probably isn't such a big deal.

Or maybe invest in some ND filters to allow you to use larger apertures.

I hadn't considered the F4. It seems it can be bought in the same $150-200 price range.

The ND filter is an excellent suggestion, but spending $50 on a filter isn't as much fun as buying another camera 😛

 

[rkm]

I have an F100, FM2N and an FM3A, love them all. If you're going to use primarily manual focus lenses the FM or FE series are far better as you really need to use the focus confirmation light as a guide with the F100 (it simply doesn't visually snap into focus like the others, no split screen either).

All are terrific cameras. My personal fav is the FM3A.

Hope that helps!

Kent

Kent, what is it you like about the FM3A over the FM2N? Is it the aperture priority mode, or is it more than that?

Also, is there another focus screen available for the F100 with the split image?

 

[doolittle]

Have a look at this website, lots of info on accessories etc.

 

[sevo]

Kent, what is it you like about the FM3A over the FM2N? Is it the aperture priority mode, or is it more than that?

Also, is there another focus screen available for the F100 with the split image?

Not from Nikon - they only had a choice of plain or grid. Beattie has one (indeed four counting all versions - horizontal or diagonal split with or without grid), but they want something like 200€ for it, more than the going rate for a used F100, and there is barely a chance you'll run across a used one.

There are DIY recipes around on the net which essentially consist of filing a FM2n/FM3A screen to fit - it is up to you whether you can perform the necessary modifications without damage to the screen.

 

[nobbylon]

F100 is a great camera for peanuts however if you are only using MF lenses then I would get an FM2. I have an FM2 at the moment and it's become my beater camera with the small version AIS 50 1.8. Not the E version. It's really no bigger than an M2 and 50, if anything it's thinner.
The F100 is quite a bit bigger and the F4 even bigger still. I only sold my F100 after getting an F5. They are basically the same camera apart from differsnces in meter and focus speed. The F4 I found to be the most clumsy camera I've used. A half way house between old and new.

 

[kdemas]

Both are superb compact cameras. I like having AE so that's the sole reason the FM3A wins out for me. The needle meter readout is also nice vs the 3 dot led of the FM2N, personal taste comes into play here. My FM2N has been a workhorse, incredibly dependable.

I understand that Nikon D1 screens may work with the F100 though I have never tried it.

Kent, what is it you like about the FM3A over the FM2N? Is it the aperture priority mode, or is it more than that?

Also, is there another focus screen available for the F100 with the split image?

 

[Mablo]

F100 is operationally completely different than FM2/FE2. F100 is great for AF lenses but only mediocre with MF lenses. I too recommend considering the F4. It has a good selection of focus screens available, works very well with MF lenses and is generally a joy to use.

 

[robert blu]

I have both, an F100 and an FM2. Shooting B&W I prefer the FM2 (mainly 50mm/1,4 AIS) because smaller, lighter and simpler. With slides (which I stopped to use) it was more the F100 (20mm/35-70 or 80-200 f 2,8). With flash (old SB 26 + cord) the F100 is excellent .
Never tried the F100 with ais lenses. Actually when I do not shoot a RF camera I use more the FM2 than the F100.
robert

 

[filmfan]

Keep the camera you have and instead, rate your HP5+ at 400 and develop at a higher temperature to get the same look as when pushing...

 

[Tompas]

FWIW, I have a F4, a FM3a and a FE2. For some reason I use the FE2 the most. And I'm thinking about selling the FM3a.

 

[rkm]

Hmmm.... Looks like an FM2/FE2/FM3A is the sensible option for me... And a ND filter might be even more sensible.

 

[mervynyan]

simple are the best, just iso, shutter, apeture controls.

 

[doolittle]

Hmmm.... Looks like an FM2/FE2/FM3A is the sensible option for me... And a ND filter might be even more sensible.

Have a look at the Nikon FA if you can find one for a reasonable price. 1/4000 shutter speed, PASM with matrix metering for AI and AI-S lenses. Great little camera, tempted to get one myself!

 

[mrb]

I have the FE and the F100; both fine machines.The FE viewfinder is a little darker than the F100's. Other than that, I prefer the FE. Match needle metering is more intuitive for me, though I suppose I'll eventually get used to the F100's meter display. The F100 isn't substantially larger than the FE, and their weight is roughly the same. I mostly use lithium batteries in my F100, and they last me six months or so. I've also used rechargable batteries in the F100, and can usually get three or four 36-exposure rolls on a single charge.

 

[Buzz40]

I've owned FEs and FE2s. I've shot with a F100. There is, to me, a profound difference in viewfinder brightness between the FE and FE2. The F100 is a completely different feel, more contemporary, automated and plasticky, but a nice grip to hang on to. Although I've moved on to the Fuji X Pro as my main shooter these days, I've held onto two FE2s and several Ai and AiS Nikkors for when I need to expose some real film. I guess the defining question to me for your decision is whether you want lots of automation or not. Personally, i much prefer the hands on work flow and feel of a traditional MF camera. The FM2n, FE2, FA, FM3A and Nikkor Ai and AiS lenses are all extremely well made and a joy to use.

 

[Mablo]

I've also used rechargable batteries in the F100, and can usually get three or four 36-exposure rolls on a single charge.

Your F100 looks like a battery eater. I can shoot several months, roll after roll, with one set of years old rechargeable Eneloops.

 

[clayne]

The best and brightest viewfinders I've found among Nikons are the ones for the F and F2 bodies. They also have a wonderful balance in the hands.

Any of the FE(2)/FM(2) bodies will work well though - and provide aperture priority (as does the F3). I just find using the older original bodies (especially the feel of the advance on the F2) to be more satisfying at times.