FTn / FT2 / FM / FM2 compared to Contaflex and Contax RF

[jgrainger]

This is probably going to seem one of the weirder comparisons or questions.

A while back I had an OM1, they're a great camera and the shutter and aperture settings were an excellent idea.. but the fact I went on to sell it is pretty telling of how it just didn't hit the spot - not missing it excludes me from rejoining team OM. A couple of years have passed and it's probably GAS, but I'd like to find the right SLR.

I really like the prewar Contax II, in use, the shape and density are just right. The finish and appearance are pretty good too. The Contaflex Super is also a favourite for the controls, shape, less movement than the Contax shutter firing, and density, but the speed and aperture would be nice to see in the viewfinder, and the bulge in the back isn't good for holding, not to mention missing a couple of FL.. I wonder how a couple of old Nikons compare.

Before I try tracking down examples to try (and sell a Canon 7 setup to fund it after recent car maintenance), it would be nice to try and narrow the field a bit.

The FTn / FT2 / FM / FM2 seem to be shaped a bit like a Contax with a prism, and in the case of the Nikkors, have similar controls to the Contaflex.

How do they compare in terms of ergonomics, size, and density?

How the 60's/70's Nikon lenses compare in rendering to old Zeiss lenses - thinking of the link to the S lenses and thereby Contax?

I have owned an old Nikkor 50mm f1.4 in the past and liked the look. I didn't like the OM lenses rendering.

 

[Forest_rain]

Wow! This is a bit all over the place. Contaflex can be found for quite cheap, I picked up a (non-super) Contaflex for $15, I'm not sure why they are so cheap. Works great but of course you can't change the lenses, but the built in lens is quite good.

With Contax II I believe you can use the Russian lenses as long as it's a prewar version, which is nice, since the Zeiss lenses can be quite expensive.

You are a bit comparing apples to oranges with all the different models here, I don't know about the Nikon lens rendering but I'm curious, since I only have 1 SLR at the moment.

But I've heard that those Nikon models can be a bit bulky.

Your Canon 7 is also quite a good camera though, not sure why you're thinking of switching away from it.

 

[Robert Lai]

Contax (and most 35mm Zeiss) are horrible to service, as they are unduly complicated in construction. The pre-war Contax didn't have any flash synchronization provision, so that is something to consider. However, given the age of these cameras, they will almost certainly need new shutter ribbons, and that's the part that makes servicing these cameras so difficult. You can do it, but getting the speeds adjusted aftewards are a nightmare.

You can mount any Contax mount lens on the pre-war Contax.
The only restriction for the Contax rangefinder is that the Contax IIa and IIIa (West German Zeiss after the war) cannot mount the pre-war 35mm Biogon lenses. The big bulgy rear lens element will hit something in the camera.

For much less money, you could get the Contax experience with a well sorted out Kiev from Fedka. At least you'll know if you like it or not before you commit big money on Contax.

Nikons are very reliable, and have excellent lenses. However, your rangefinder lenses are likely to have as excellent a rendition, and have less distortion to boot, as they aren't having to be separated by a mirror box away from the film plane. Also, it's a whole new lens system to acquire.

Why not just stick with your Canon 7?

 

[jgrainger]

I've presently got a Kiev and a small collection of Contax II/III in various states of working or for parts, along with a few FL from Zeiss and Jupiter. I've also got a couple of different Contaflex models, they're great too.

I'm not going to be getting rid of the Contaxes/ Kiev / Contaflice, and the servicing doesn't really bother me (presently learning to service the Contaflex).

The Canon 7 seems to offer so much, yet I'm just not bothered about it.

I figure there must be some slr's which are shaped / handle / feel / offer the rendering to compliment the Contax lenses. The Nikon FM/2 and Nikkor FTn/2 seem to tick this box on the computer screen.. I guess that a company basing a pro slr on a pro rangefinder, externally somewhat based on my favourite rangefinder, probably happened to make their Nikkormats a good candidate for what I'm after.. but I haven't held any in person.

To sum it up in some specific questions,

Do any Contax / Kiev users happen to also enjoy using these Nikon models / find them natural?

How well do these different Nikon/ Nikkor models compare for damping?

 

[Robert Lai]

If the bulk and weight of the Canon 7 is what is off-putting to you, you probably won't like SLRs. Part of the beauty and the charm of the Contax / Kiev rangefinders is their small size.


The one SLR that will fit your criteria seems to be the Nikon F. It's essentially the Nikon SP rangefinder with a prism stuck on top. Nikon copied the Contax lens focusing direction (to infinity), and I think the aperture control also. So, focusing should feel natural to you.

 

[presspass]

The Ftn, etc are larger and heavier than the FM series. Both are durable and work well. The Ftn and F2 have one big advantage - they can meter the pre-ai lenses without stopping down. The pre-ai lenses are less expensive than the newer ones and many use the same 52 mm filters. Also keep in mind the shutter speed dial is on the top with the FMs and the Ft series is around the lens mount. If you can, handle both before deciding.

 

[Pentode]

Do any Contax / Kiev users happen to also enjoy using these Nikon models / find them natural?

In a word; yes. I enjoy using Kiev and Contax rangefinders and I also enjoy the FM2 and the Nikkormat FTn. If you liked having the shutter speed dial on the lens mount when you used Olympus gear, you’ll find it in the same place on the Nikkormat. The FM2 is smaller, lighter and a little more ergonomic than the Nikkormat but they’re both excellent cameras. The meter on the FM2 is an LED display as opposed to the Nikkormat’s match needle. It’s also more accurate. Either model, well maintained, will be extremely reliable. Neither one is even remotely similar in use to a Contax rangefinder.

Older Nikkor glass is, to my eye, similar to post-war Zeiss in contrast. Later Nikkors have higher contrast. I’m not enough of a lens expert to tell you much more than that. I haven’t met a Nikkor prime I didn’t like. Some are better than others but none of them stinks.

I’ve never handled a Contaflex.

 

[jgrainger]

Robert,

The Canon 7 is more than just the size, it's like a perfect screw-mount post-war camera, but one which doesn't do anything for me on an emotional level.. kind of like finding someone's faults endearing vs a robot which does nothing wrong.

The F is nice but a bit more money than I'd like to spend - I guessed the FT/FM models have a similar form and function.. I don't need to be swapping prisms, or realistically, screens.

Presspass,
The heavier weight can be good or bad. Having a bit of density is quite reassuring - I'll just have to track some down locally to compare.

In reasonable condition how do these models compare for damping or noticeable movement on firing the shutter? - would you say any one stands out as being better or worse than the rest.

Pentode,
The post-war Zeiss look would be appealing, and the same for the price. The difference in the shutter speed selector isn't a single make or break for ergonomics but it requires a slightly different mindset - though I really like the idea of the front speed ring.

At this point, from what I've read here and elsewhere, it seems to be between the FTn (vintage charm/ lens mounting) and an early example of the FM2 (some impressive specs while still being a bit old and different).. I don't make money from photography, it's all about the right experience with a bit of a collectors/ vintage side. It worries me that the FM/FM2 wouldn't be endearing enough / too faultlessly efficient without enough character.

 

[Pentode]

it seems to be between the FTn (vintage charm/ lens mounting) and an early example of the FM2 (some impressive specs while still being a bit old and different)..

The differences between the FM/FM2/FM2n are fairly minimal. One thing to note is that you can't use Pre-AI lenses on the FM2/FM2n, stop-down metered or not. You need the original FM for that.

The mirror damping between FMs and Nikkormats... geeez, I dunno... I never really thought about it. To me they seem more or less the same. They flip up and down when you take a picture.

One thing I like about the Nikkormats - hardly an important feature, really - is that the cold shoe is removable. I haven't used flash in decades so I like to take it off and I think the camera looks classier without it. Not exactly a make-or-break thing, but I dig it.

If you like older cameras and you're torn between the Nikkormat and the FM go for the Nikkormat. They're a whole lot cheaper and they're excellent machines.

 

[jgrainger]

I've managed to have a look at a FT and 2 FTn in person, taking my Kiev II for comparison. There's not a lot in it but the available "n's" had a better screen and the speed visible in the viewfinder.

I expected them to be bigger - based on online measurements, but they're really about the same size as a pre-war Contax/ Kiev with a prism stuck on top. The smoothness and movement on firing was quite respectable too, for an old returning mirror design, rather than say, a modern F4 or later.

On paper the FM doesn't seem to offer anything really better than the FTn, just a different way of working and slightly smaller shell.. seeing the aperture scale isn't necessarily of any benefit when there's DOF preview and the older lenses don't have the scale in the right place to appear in the viewfinder.. I don't use flash in a quick setting on manual mode either, and use a handle mount.

Pentode,
Your comment about the lack of hotshoe resonates as well.

I'll find an affordable FTn and a couple of favourite FL lenses.

Thanks for everyone's input

 

[Pentode]

I'll find an affordable FTn and a couple of favourite FL lenses.

Something to be mindful of when looking for a Nikkormat FTn is that the meters are often (almost always) jumpy or intermittent. In most cases they only require a good cleaning by an experienced tech, but that's an added expense to what is normally a very inexpensive camera. Just something to watch out for.

The meters were originally designed for mercury cells and a modern 625a or SR-44 (with adapter) is likely to cause a bit of underexposure. I'm sure there's a way to adjust it but both of mine are within 1/3 of a stop of 'right' and I shoot print film so I don't lose sleep over it. At some point I'll add a diode to the battery wire but I'm in no big hurry. For now I just compensate with the film speed selector and call it art.

They also often need new seals and mirror foam, but that's true of any SLR of that age.

 

[Filter Factor]

It worries me that the FM/FM2 wouldn't be endearing enough / too faultlessly efficient without enough character.

Character? It's a camera, not a puppy. I am sure you'll warm up to it, whichever model you choose.

 

[presspass]

Two responses:
First, the Ftn, etc.,, probably dampens the mirror and shutter better simply because of its mass.
Second, the Ft2 uses the current battery rather than the mercury one specified for the Ft and Ftn. I use a newer battery with my Ftn and compensated by adjusting the ISO after comparing the camera with an accurate spot meter, aiming both at a wall mounted grey card.

 

[Forest_rain]

I kind of know what you mean. When I got my Canon III it was technologically inferior to my Canon 7 but it seemed older and had a "historical", less modern feel to it. However the viewfinder was too squinty and they are expensive to maintain (mine had deteriorating shutter curtains).

If you're looking for character and German lenses you could try a Praktica. They lenses seem to be well regarded and they are reputed to be similar to Zeiss, at bargain prices.

Unfortunately I've found them to be more finnicky than their Wester German counterparts. I went through 3 Prakticas before I found a working one (praktica BMS), however this has now become my main SLR. The lenses are often found to be de-centered, may not be as "perfect" as the Zeiss. I think the rendering is different. My Contaflex renders really well and was cheap so I was surprised, and my Praktica lenses seem to be a bit more crude. The shutter is also quite LOUD on my Praktica and has a pretty big mirror slap. It just never seems to hit the mark of the effortlessly performing, smooth Japanese cameras and feels a little more crude, but they do have a following, and it does have some character.

However it works so I just continue to use it, but I will only be using Japanese or Leica/Zeiss in the future. I have enough cameras so I won't be buying anymore in the near future though, and will just focus on taking pictures.

 

[jgrainger]

Pentode, Presspas: In terms of the meter, I'll either add a diode (added one to my old OM), or, found mention on another thread.. that it may be possible to practically add the meter circuit from a FT2.. this idea was also looking good in terms of gaining a donor FT2 focus screen..

In the end I've found a FTN listed online with a type A screen - which might do nicely, so will probably go for the diode plan once tested. Will start out by compensating with the ISO dial to get going.

In terms of the long-term durability of the meter, there's some talk of the meter resistor being a paint-on deal.. might do some research on resistive paints, and potentiometers (for possibly pinching a track from) - they might be too thick to fit.

The seals on this example look good enough to test, but they'll all need doing eventually - will have a look online.

Forest Rain: The Prakticas are pretty decent but I've tried and didn't keep one about a decade ago. They're exactly as you describe, the sound is pretty memorable, like some sounds which come from a 90's diesel Merc or when not quite closing the doors shut, lol. The lenses are still tidy performers.

A working Contaflex is also a great camera within the limits of the available focal lengths, it must be the non-returning mirror - they're really steady upon firing.

I'll post a picture of the FTN when it arrives.

 

[Pentode]

Took me a while to loop back around to this thread but I made it back....

will probably go for the diode plan once tested. Will start out by compensating with the ISO dial to get going.

Another option is to use a hearing aid battery to test at the correct voltage and then add a diode so you can use longer lasting silver cells.

terms of the long-term durability of the meter, there's some talk of the meter resistor being a paint-on deal.. might do some research on resistive paints, and potentiometers (for possibly pinching a track from) - they might be too thick to fit.

I think you'll find that, in most cases, you're more likely to run into oxidation and dirt due to lack of use than you will actual wear. I've read a lot about worn-out resistive strips in meter coupling but I've never actually seen it in person. I have, on the other hand, seen plenty of dirt. Most meters stop jumping after a good cleaning. I'm sure there must be some that have actually worn out but I haven't met one yet.

Looking forward to seeing your new toy!

 

[jgrainger]

It arrived in the post today..


Not perfect, but pretty good - with factory fitted split screen 🙂

 

[jgrainger]

And..


(Will check the light meter in a bit)

 

[AlwaysOnAuto]

Looks good to me!
Congrats!

 

[Doddle]

Nikkormats are great and offer a very refined shooting experience. The standout lens for early F mount in my opinion is the 50 f2.