Film dino
David Chong
If not mistaken the Nikkormat FTn is just over 26 oz.
Shutter speed controlled via a ring round the lens throat: a nice feature, I feel.
Also changing ASA is via base of lens throat... clunky & a threat to finger nails! Much better on the FT2 though still in the same location. Of course this won't be important to you if you don't use the meter.
Nice plain view through the finder: for the minimalist. Unmetered version of the FT- the FS- is sought after & typically sells for more (Edit) & the FS was made in smaller numbers, so relatively rare
Shutter speed controlled via a ring round the lens throat: a nice feature, I feel.
Also changing ASA is via base of lens throat... clunky & a threat to finger nails! Much better on the FT2 though still in the same location. Of course this won't be important to you if you don't use the meter.
Nice plain view through the finder: for the minimalist. Unmetered version of the FT- the FS- is sought after & typically sells for more (Edit) & the FS was made in smaller numbers, so relatively rare
barnwulf
Well-known
I have never had a Nikkormat but I have a Nikon F and a FE2. I would pick the FE2 everytime. I have had it since the mid 1980s and it's still a great light weight camera. I am sure a FM is the nearly the same. Batteries are not a problem, just carry a spare. - Jim
tomnrides
Established
Get an F3, does all the things FM, FE, FM/FE/2, 2n3n do, Auto exposure clocks to 30sec, with finder black out shutter. The build and finish are better than FM/FE series. I suppose FA has a better meter, but pricier somehow. N80/F100 can use AFS meaning the most current lenses can be used. Disadvantage is the little LCD readout for f-stop, but it is illuminated. These seem to go for all about the same price, of $100 or so on Craigs.
FrankS
Registered User
BillBingham2
Registered User
Having owned both I would go with a Nikkormat FT3 or FTn. The FT3 takes newer batteries and is AI savvy. Equal workhorse to my beloved FTn (first SLR). The FM does not have the same feel in my hands but she is lighter. As price is an issue (otherwise get an F with a plain prism or a FM3a) I thing you're better off with the FT3. Either way you will not go wrong. The FT3 has the K screen and the MD12 really never proved itself worth the weight, but that is me.
There are a few great people out there who do a great job with CLA and foam.
B2 (;->
There are a few great people out there who do a great job with CLA and foam.
B2 (;->
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
I had a Nikkormat FTn. Good camera with good metering system, but the build quality is a bit flimsy. My shutter speed control slipped one notch, so it was off one stop. I have used my two FE2's extensively and they have been tough and reliable. Good meter setup there, too. I also have an FA. It has a very soft mirror action with low slap. Along with the F100, it may have the lowest mirror slap of almost any SLR. Also had an F3, but sold it as it was too loud and the mirror slap was pretty bad.
FrankS
Registered User
Wow, that is the first time ever that I've heard the build quality of an FTn called flimsy! The Nikkormat (n, 2, 3) is typically descrribed as tank-like.
sparrow6224
Well-known
FM2n.... I got mine on you-know-where for about $135. KEH is in that range for the 'bargain' rated ones which are in my experience with KEH in excellent shape. Watch for the high serial numbers (over 8,600,000 say; or at least over 8M) you are buying a camera that was built and sold in the late 80s or perhaps early 90s(??) (Do an internet search on the dates as I can't remember exactly.) Which isn't nearly so long ago as 1977 or 1980 or whatever. Which means you have a newer camera.
And they're great. Read about the FM2n and the FE2 on Cameraquest.
No one has talked about lenses. There is one absolutely priceless and reliable and fascinating site to read about Nikon lenses: http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_surv.html
My own brief and fairly knowledgeable (at this point) lens round up:
You can use Ai or Ai-S plus AF and AF-D lenses in manual mode. AF-S with a G doesn't work. If you happen upon a delightful pre-Ai lens the conversion is not that big a deal and there is a guy all the Nikonistas know (in Ohio, I think) who does it for not a lot of money. Check the Nikon forum on photo.net. Here are what I think are the three essentials:
Nikkor 28mm f/2.8 Ai-S (avoid the Ai version).
Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 Ai or Ai-S. (avoid the pancake, get the 'long nose' for better performance). If you must have the f/1.4 go for it; it too is excellent. Just so you know: the sharpest 50mm Nikon made was the little discussed f/2.0 which I think is only in Ai.
Finally, VERY IMPORTANT: the 105mm f/2.5 (Ai or Ai-S) is the most beautiful lens I own, including a few (not the best, obviously) Leicas. You must have one.
General notes: Avoid the Nikon 24mm in any permutation. They never made a good one. The 20mm is better, but pricey. Watch e-Bay. Some say the f/4 is great, some say not, only the f2.8. Me, I lust after the 18mm f/3.5 Ai-S.... which costs even more, like $750 on the used market. More than my first two cars. Combined.
All the 35mm lenses are expensive, except one little neglected gem: I had an E series (cheaper consumer line Nikon intro'd when they started getting their asses kicked by Sigma et al) 35mm f/2.5 that I loved. You can get that for under $50. I now have the f/2 Ai-S and haven't decided yet whether the cost
was worth it.
You can live w/o any of the Nikon 135s. They're not that great. Longer than that gets quite pricey except for a hidden gem: the Nikkor 200mm f/4. These are often only $60 or so and are light and sharp and rich in color and just a pleasure in every way.
So all together the FM2n at $135 and the 28/2.8 Ai-S at about that as well (breathtaking close up at 0.2m); and the 50mm f/1.8 at $50 and the 105/2.5 at $100 and the 200/4 at $60 --- you'll need about $500. But you can start off with the camera and the 50mm for under $200.
Enjoy. They're not graceful but they're classic; the Ford F150 of camera systems.
And they're great. Read about the FM2n and the FE2 on Cameraquest.
No one has talked about lenses. There is one absolutely priceless and reliable and fascinating site to read about Nikon lenses: http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_surv.html
My own brief and fairly knowledgeable (at this point) lens round up:
You can use Ai or Ai-S plus AF and AF-D lenses in manual mode. AF-S with a G doesn't work. If you happen upon a delightful pre-Ai lens the conversion is not that big a deal and there is a guy all the Nikonistas know (in Ohio, I think) who does it for not a lot of money. Check the Nikon forum on photo.net. Here are what I think are the three essentials:
Nikkor 28mm f/2.8 Ai-S (avoid the Ai version).
Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 Ai or Ai-S. (avoid the pancake, get the 'long nose' for better performance). If you must have the f/1.4 go for it; it too is excellent. Just so you know: the sharpest 50mm Nikon made was the little discussed f/2.0 which I think is only in Ai.
Finally, VERY IMPORTANT: the 105mm f/2.5 (Ai or Ai-S) is the most beautiful lens I own, including a few (not the best, obviously) Leicas. You must have one.
General notes: Avoid the Nikon 24mm in any permutation. They never made a good one. The 20mm is better, but pricey. Watch e-Bay. Some say the f/4 is great, some say not, only the f2.8. Me, I lust after the 18mm f/3.5 Ai-S.... which costs even more, like $750 on the used market. More than my first two cars. Combined.
All the 35mm lenses are expensive, except one little neglected gem: I had an E series (cheaper consumer line Nikon intro'd when they started getting their asses kicked by Sigma et al) 35mm f/2.5 that I loved. You can get that for under $50. I now have the f/2 Ai-S and haven't decided yet whether the cost
was worth it.
You can live w/o any of the Nikon 135s. They're not that great. Longer than that gets quite pricey except for a hidden gem: the Nikkor 200mm f/4. These are often only $60 or so and are light and sharp and rich in color and just a pleasure in every way.
So all together the FM2n at $135 and the 28/2.8 Ai-S at about that as well (breathtaking close up at 0.2m); and the 50mm f/1.8 at $50 and the 105/2.5 at $100 and the 200/4 at $60 --- you'll need about $500. But you can start off with the camera and the 50mm for under $200.
Enjoy. They're not graceful but they're classic; the Ford F150 of camera systems.
nobbylon
Veteran
PKR
Veteran
Paul; I've been using F3 HPs for some time. They are heaver than an FE, but the best optical viewing I've found. I use a +1 diopter correction on my finder and also have a DW3 finder that I love. I used FEs for a while and they are great. If you want a smaller body, it's a good choice. The viewing in the F3 HP spoiled me years ago and with all the high priced digital gear I have for work, none of it has viewing optics as good as the HP finder. F3 HPs and FEs are cheap these days. Get one of each and play with them. Sell off the one you like the least, or keep both. If you get an F3 HP, also consider the DW3 as an accessory. You can adjust the DW3 for your vision. I'm also a fan of the "E" screen. A "B" is nice to have for long lenses. Let us know what you do. p.
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
I agree with this. My 24/2.8 AIS was a wonderful lens. Yes, it had low contrast wide open, and vignetted significantly. Proabably more than 2 stops in the extreme corners. This is fine for the kinds of photojournalistic situations where you'd use a 24 wide open. By f/4 or 5.6 the lens was well behaved, and at f/8 or f/11 it was entirely competent.
It's not an Elmarit, but then, my Nikkor 35/2 AIS was about as sharp at f/5.6 as my Summilux ASPH was at f/1.7.
In most situations it won't matter. If you prefer 24 to 28 (I do, very strongly), just get the 24 and use it.
Last edited:
PKR
Veteran
I have a 105 2.5. the one with the hood on the barrel. It's a great lens. Of the 24 and 28 mm Floating Element lenses, all are good until they get bounced. The floating element must be factory repaired.. at least in the old days. The US dealers (EPOI / Nikon USA) sent them to Japan. I have a 28 F2.8. it's very sharp at f4-5.6. I also own a 20 F4 that's very sharp and has better contrast than my previous 20 f2.8.
Last edited:
Steve M.
Veteran
If your current cameras serve you well, just put a diopter on them. Not available? I saw a neat web article where the photographer couldn't find a diopter for his particular camera so he went to the drugstore, bought a pair of inexpensive reading glasses for his prescription, and cut down a diopter w/ a Dremel tool. He then filed the diopter to the correct final size and pressed it into his camera's eyepiece. Presto, a $5 diopter. You could always glue it on as well.
Film dino
David Chong
nobbylon
Veteran
depends on what era you want too. ols school feel, solid, large etc, go for a Nikkormat ft2 or 3. the FT doesn't have a split prism focus screen so it's easier with 2's and 3's. New school change toward lighter cameras, go for an FM2n. It has proven itself over the years and is a nice camera. Forget the FM as an FM2n is not going to be that much more, however the FM can use both pre AI and all later AI inc A/F as it has the flip up AI tab on the lens throat just like the FT3.
If weight isn't a major issue and funds allow then go for an F or F2. IMHO the greatest mechanical SLR's ever made.
Lenses? 105mm 2.5 AI version because of the longer focus throw than the AIS. The equal best Nikkor I've used even wide open (sharp as a pin) to a 28mm AIS 2.8. 0.2m focus version. Fantastic lens.
Any 50 f2 from Nikon is sharp and cheap
If weight isn't a major issue and funds allow then go for an F or F2. IMHO the greatest mechanical SLR's ever made.
Lenses? 105mm 2.5 AI version because of the longer focus throw than the AIS. The equal best Nikkor I've used even wide open (sharp as a pin) to a 28mm AIS 2.8. 0.2m focus version. Fantastic lens.
Any 50 f2 from Nikon is sharp and cheap
Ronald_H
Don't call me Ron
All the wise things have already been said 
I'd go for an FM. Cheap, indestructible and it can use both Ai and no-Ai lenses, the FM2 cannot. I am actually seriously thinking of having the mount of my FM2 converted for this reason.
AFAIK I prefer the LED meter readout, because it is easy to see in near total darkness (concerts). It has to be said however that the FM's metering system is not that accurate during those conditions, the FM2's is better.
If the budget stretches to a FM3A, go for that. It combines all the goodness of the FE2 and FM2 in one camera. If it would have the FM/FE's mount it would be perfect.
I'd go for an FM. Cheap, indestructible and it can use both Ai and no-Ai lenses, the FM2 cannot. I am actually seriously thinking of having the mount of my FM2 converted for this reason.
AFAIK I prefer the LED meter readout, because it is easy to see in near total darkness (concerts). It has to be said however that the FM's metering system is not that accurate during those conditions, the FM2's is better.
If the budget stretches to a FM3A, go for that. It combines all the goodness of the FE2 and FM2 in one camera. If it would have the FM/FE's mount it would be perfect.
amateriat
We're all light!
In the day, I ran into a lot of shooters for the NY Daily News, NY Post, and AP (staff and stringers) for whom the original Nikon FM was standard-issue gear. I won't kid you that the things were as bulletproof as an F or F2, but they had a decent enough rep, and only got better in later iterations.
I had an FM2 when it was first released, and it was a solid camera, my only beef with it being lack of VF eye-relief like I enjoyed with my F3 HPs. Loved its size and weight.
I'd certainly take an FM2, FE2 or FM3a over any Nikkormat (even though I'm fond of the FT2). If I want to deal with something full-size, I'll grab an F3.
- Barrett
Last edited:
sanmich
Veteran
There is one thing the nikkormats (most of them) do better than the rest:
they will give you light measure with non-AI lenses.
Once you have a Nikkormat, you have access to a huge park of good, significantly cheaper Nikkor lenses.
The size of the FM/FE series is nice though...
they will give you light measure with non-AI lenses.
Once you have a Nikkormat, you have access to a huge park of good, significantly cheaper Nikkor lenses.
The size of the FM/FE series is nice though...
BillBingham2
Registered User
peter_n
Veteran
I also agree. I have an AF 24/2.8 and I'm surprised by how good it is. Yes it's not a 24/2.8 Elmarit but it's a very able lens.
OP: Go for the FM. I was an F3 guy but bought one of my kids an FM2 several years ago for her high school photography class and she's still using it. A great little camera; she still loves it and prefers it to her Canon digi!