Can of Worms: Nikon FE2 or Leica M7?

There would be no logical reason to replace the FE2 with an M7. The bodies have a similar size, Nikkor AIS and Leica lenses are both excellent, you have AE metering in both cameras ... the images will be identical. All it boils down to is your personal preference and nobody can answer that for you.

I also have an FE2 and find framing of wide-angle shots with the E (grid) focusing screen much more precise compared to a range finder.
 
David_Manning said:
I'm sentencing myself to shoot ten rolls of film in the FE2 to make sure I'm willing to work with film again...that's the first question I think I need to ask myself...before considering an M7.
Click to expand...

Totally agree that that's the key issues! If you are 100% committed to shooting film for many years to come and if your lifelong dream was to own a Leica M, then by all means, getting an M7 would make sense. However, the pictures that you shoot with an M7 won't be any better than the pictures you shoot with an FE2, but you know that, of course.

I'm in the exact same situation as you are and I would love to have an M7, my heart is craving for an M7 and my brain is telling me that I'm an idiot thinking that way. :roll eyes: My wife even told me last week "For god's sake, why don't you just go & buy a Leica so we're done with it and you can think and talk about something else!" :rolleyes:
 
I have and use both an M7 and an FE2. I find the FE2 to be the more versatile of the two, in that I can use all my Nikkors from 15mm to 400mm and see on the finder screen what I am going to get. The center-weighted exposure system is better than the Leica M method; even though the Leica is very good as well.

The advantage of the Leica (for me) is the smaller size and weight of the lenses; the quality of the lenses; and I just happen to be very comfortable with the Leica viewfinder/rangefinder. So it's a very fine camera for me when I only need a limited selection of focal lengths.

The Nikon is more of a go-everywhere and do-everything camera. And some of the lenses are world class as well.
 
David,

if you like shooting rangefinder more than SLR and want to shoot film, I would pick up a RF film camera.
otherwise, definitely use the FE2 for the rare moments you're itching to shoot film.
 
Okay, since starting this thread, I kept the FE2, and bit the bullet and went digital Leica (M9). My M9 is one of my two favorite cameras to shoot, the other being the Ricoh GR (tiny, stellar 28mm in my pants pocket).

I desire a quieter, more mature M9, which obviously would be the M240-series. But Those M7 buys still look good. I think at the end of the day, digital works better for my workflow--the amount of time and effort I have for post-processing and archiving.

So I think my original thread-starting question has been answered by my decision to buy an M9 instead of an M7. The pros of the workflow outweigh the cons. I STILL think an M7 would be really cool...it's a bit thinner, simpler, fairly modern in operation, quiet...but it's hard to invest a lot of money and time into stepping back to a film workflow (for me).

That said...I've been shooting a Fuji X-T1 this weekend at the lake, and the uncanny similarity to a digital FE2 is obvious...plus, I'm able to shoot wide-open during the day at 1/32,000 of a second.
 
Since this is properly resurrected, I'll just add my $.02 to those who suggested the Hexar RF and the ZI; both do the modern RF job for rather less investment and in your case, maybe, less worry in dodgy ports. Dante Stella's Hexar/M7 comparison is delightful, skeptical and instructive. I had to sell back the ZI Jonmanjiro sold me, he missed it too much, but I keep my Hexar (and an M5).
 
Because of a neurological condition, I had to give up shooting my Leica, and my FM welcomed me back with open arms. I'm shooting it with the Nikkor-OC 2/35 Ai'd.
I've always liked the pictures you made with your FE2. Stick with that!
 
as another Hexar RF owner, I can vouch for it's greatness
Now that I think about it, it's the closest film camera to the M9, has auto winding and film advancement, 1/4000s max shutter plus equally as loud :p

David, for your digital need I guess it depends on what you're looking for, SLR vs RF, EVF vs OVF?
I myself went M9 (2013) to A7 (2014) and now I'm going back to M240(2015).
My reasoning is because I prefer shooting RF and OVF over SLR and EVF.
The M240 can offer both world since it's a RF but at the same time it has live view and can take an EVF.

Food for thought but a used/refurbished M240 goes for as much as a used M9 AND a brand new X-T1
 
A lot of redundant answers here. Mine will be too.

First, keep the FE2 system. I have one and will never part with it. It is my SLR option for those times SLR is what's needed.

I have film M's for those times when a rangefinder is best for what's needed. Not an M7, but that doesn't matter.

I love keeping these two systems because I feel like I have every possible situation covered. I can do anything (starting to feel immortal now) macro, portrait, events, sports, wildlife, "street", family, still life/product). Seriously, I need both and either/or is not an option.

Someone mentioned a Hexar RF. Seems good, you'd retain some of the specs you get with the FE2 (top shutter speed, metering, etc....maybe even TTL flash? I'd have to look that up). The Hexar isn't a Leica though, and maybe you need of that Leica experience. I understand. Really.

A Leica is just a light-tight-box like any other competent camera. Right? But it has that special Keebler magic that somehow makes ME feel inspired to make photographs worthy of a Leica. So in the end, its all psychological. Its not really the camera, its me. Its "all in my head".

I don't think I'm helping...
 
David_Manning said:
Okay, since starting this thread, I kept the FE2, and bit the bullet and went digital Leica (M9). My M9 is one of my two favorite cameras to shoot, the other being the Ricoh GR (tiny, stellar 28mm in my pants pocket).

I desire a quieter, more mature M9, which obviously would be the M240-series. But Those M7 buys still look good. I think at the end of the day, digital works better for my workflow--the amount of time and effort I have for post-processing and archiving.

So I think my original thread-starting question has been answered by my decision to buy an M9 instead of an M7. The pros of the workflow outweigh the cons. I STILL think an M7 would be really cool...it's a bit thinner, simpler, fairly modern in operation, quiet...but it's hard to invest a lot of money and time into stepping back to a film workflow (for me).

That said...I've been shooting a Fuji X-T1 this weekend at the lake, and the uncanny similarity to a digital FE2 is obvious...plus, I'm able to shoot wide-open during the day at 1/32,000 of a second.
Click to expand...

Good stuff. :)

Regards the bolded bit above, I had the M9 for three years and upgraded to the M-P typ 240 when the offer was made available and my M9's sensor needed replacement. I am SO glad I did. The typ 240 series is far nicer to use, for me, melding the capabilities of today's digital with the traditional feel of the film bodies. And I like its output, even the JPEGs direct out of the camera, much more. I don't miss the M9 at all, I love shooting with the M-P, and have expanded my Leica kit as a result. It's now my primary camera.

onwards!
G
 
OK SPICY, WE GET IT.

But, it seems to me that he still has unrequited love for an M7 deep in his heart. I had that same feeling too. I tried Bessa R, Leica IIIF, then an M3, M2, and M5 to quell that feeling. All excellent in their way, but they were not the ONE.

Now that M7 prices are down, they are far more affordable than they used to be.

I had a Nikon F3 for 25 years too. Fabulous camera, and very similar in function to the M7, with the aperture priority AE. Having said that, the FE2 is the same also in this respect. The Nikons are super durable, and the lenses can turn out professional quality results. No one denies this.

But, the F3 has gone. The F and F2 don't really make up for it, though they try.

And, a "new" (to me) used M7 has entered my life.
Because, deny as much as you want to David, you want an M7. Your heart still wants that M7, that's why you resurrected this old thread. You won't be satisfied until you satisfy your desire.
 
Okay...I'll admit it. I still not-so-secretly desire an M7. Just trying to build up the courage to pull the trigger.

Maybe time to part with a 5DmkII and some lenses. My wife is already convinced I'm crazy and illogical.
 
I'm going to sell 100L, I have to use this money to upgrade 5D to 6D, but my wife doesn't understand why 5D is any better comparing to our 500D.
I might spend 100L money to get second made in Canada film M. It is crazy and illogical.
 
David_Manning said:
Okay...I'll admit it. I still not-so-secretly desire an M7. Just trying to build up the courage to pull the trigger.
Click to expand...

Buy, try and sell, route I've gone with most of cameras I wanted. Few years of GAS madness, fueled with credit card and now I'm settled with lowly R4 and adaptalled tamron (payed with real money). So be brave mon ami, it's nothing you can't sell (at similar price).
 
I'll throw my answers into the fray. I own the FE2, M9 and M7, so let me give you my perspective.

Between the SLR and the rangefinder, the key differences for me are the shutter sound, size and the ability to visualize the shots. The FE2 emits a loud smack, while the M9 is a more moderate "shick" and the M7 a very quiet "snick". Packing a 28mm, 35mm, 50mm and 85/90mm lens combination, the Leica will be very much more compact.

Most importantly for me, the SLR shows me exactly what I am getting in my images, so more than just the angle of view, I can see the "perspective" (I know it's technically not correct use of the word) of the wide-angle lenses, which I can't see in a rangefinder. And it focuses much closer than the 0.7m of a Leica.

Of all the rangefinder Leica's that I've used (M2,M3,M4,M6,M7, M9), the M7 is easily the quietest with its electronically controlled shutter. I shoot in aperture-priority mode almost exclusively, so the M7 is my favourite film Leica. Without having to think about changing light conditions, it frees me up to focus on the image more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom