Nikon SLR fans: Nikkormat or FM?

As has already been said, it's all been said. I have them all - a Nikkormat FTn, FM, FE, FM2n, FE2, F3HP, but not an FM3a. They all have their pros and cons, but I think my favourite among those is the FE2. And my least favourite is the Nikkormat, which I have to admit is a shelf queen. Reason: unobtainable battery, unobtainable dioptre, and will only take pre-Ai lenses. The F3HP is the best for lens compatibility - it will take every F mount lens ever made, but IMHO it is let down by the dim LCD display in the VF. The FE series have the best VF display with the match needle system, but it is difficult to see in poor light. The FM series are good in poor light with the red LED display in the VF. The original FE and FM will take every F mount lens except those requiring mirror lockup. The FE2 and FM2 series will not mount pre-Ai lenses. And none of them are "just consumer grade Nikons, toy like in comparison". They are all built like the proverbial brick outhouse.
 
I much appreciate the lens advice. I am a 50-55mm prime lens guy, but I'll get a 28 or 35, too.
It would be extra neat to get as normal that focuses down to a foot or so. Any Nikon primes do that? I am not a speed freak; f1.8-f2 is fine ...
 
paulfish4570 said:
I much appreciate the lens advice. I am a 50-55mm prime lens guy, but I'll get a 28 or 35, too.
It would be extra neat to get as normal that focuses down to a foot or so. Any Nikon primes do that? I am not a speed freak; f1.8-f2 is fine ...
Click to expand...

55mm F2.8 Micro Nikkor.
 
wotalegend-
Your Nikkormat FTn doesn't have to stay a shelf queen. For a battery of correct voltage you can use a Wein cell, a similar hearing aid battery, or a CRIS or similar adapter for silver cells. I just got a dioptre for my finder last July for 99 cents plus shipping. It was advertised as being for a Nikon FM; however, the following models all use the same dioptre: Nikkormat, Nikon F, FA, FE, FE2, FM, FM2, FM3A, and maybe others. But be careful, there are seven different varieties of Nikon dioptres. There is a chart on the web that lists then all by model number. As for using only pre-AI lenses--any lens with "ears" will work perfectly. Some of my AI-S lenses have ears, some don't. If not, just meter stopped down. However, if you want to leave the Nikkormat on the shelf, you certainly have a group of wonderful other cameras to choose from.
 
Thanks again for all of the advice.

FrankS: I had that Nikkormat on my watch list, along with several other FTNs and FMs, for sport since I don't yet have the cash. It looked like a nice one.

I received seal kits today for my two ST605s to get them ready for sale.
 
I will also jump in here and say that the Nikkormat FTn is built like a tank. Solid. I had one for a while that I subjected to a number of tough conditions and it never even developed so much as a light leak. I finally sold it, not because I didn't like it, but just because I never used it and felt that it was better off with someone who would.
They are dirt cheap these days, and take equally cheap (in price, not quality) non ai lenses.

I also hear good things about the FM2n, but it's more expensive.
 
I use a Nikon FM2 regularly when not shooting my Leicas. I think this is a great camera for several reasons:

1> Forward compatibility with Nikon DSLR lenses EXCEPT G lenses. The G lenses do not have aperture rings
2> Fully mechanical allows all shutter speeds to function when battery fails
3> Built-in LED light meter which appears in the viewfinder
4> Viewfinder shows shutter speed and aperture as well as contains split-prism focus screen.

Add that it's light, small, and sturdily made and I believe this is a great all-around camera. Can't go wrong with the FM2.
 
A disadvantage of the FE2, FM2, and FA is that one can not mount pre-AI lenses. There are many of these, they are inexpensive, and they are good.

The older (Nikkormat) and pro level bodies (F, F2, F3, F4) can mount AI and pre-AI lenses.
 
No one mentioned the Nikon EL2 (1976), one of my all time favorite of the non F series. Build quality was definitely a little better than the all manual Nikkormats. Very similar to the FE in function but all metal, slightly bigger, better balanced and it did have a mirror lock up that worked better than the Nikkormats. The only minor drawbacks was that the battery stored under the mirror and the focus screen was not interchangable by the user. Like many Nikons of this vintage, I don't know about parts availability for repair.
 
I have had Nikkormats and they are tanks however, they use non-Ai lenses. They are getting older and although they will still function with the newer battery they are supposed to use the older mercury battery. The non-Ai lenses are not as sharp as the newer Ai and Ai-S lenses. And, although the Nikkormats are inexpensive you would be better off with an F3HP. It is newer and does not have the battery problem. Ergonomically, there is no comparison as the F3HP is miles ahead; it also has a removable prism and motor drive accessablity. The lenses for the F3HP which are Ai/Ai-S and Zeiss are considerably more expensive but much better. At this stage of the game a Nikkormat is a camera for a raw beginner. Would I replace a Pentax Spotmatic with a Nikkormat? No.
 
Steve, I love my SP1000, but cannot get a corrective eyepiece for it or my Fujica ST605s. I am tired of pulling my reading glasses on and off, on and off, on and off to make a shot, make a shot, make a shot ... :)
That is the ONLY reason I want to make the switch.
 
I'd say either a FM2, FE2, FM3A, or a F3HP. The one problem with the F3 is the LCD readout, but that is one *SMOOTH* camera! It feels like a fine piece of craftsmanship. I love the feel and performance of my F3HP, but prefer the size of my FM2.
 
sparrow6224 said:
General notes: Avoid the Nikon 24mm in any permutation. They never made a good one.

You can live w/o any of the Nikon 135s. They're not that great.
Click to expand...

I'd have to disagree about the 24mm. I have the 24/2.8 in both the MF and AF versions, and find them perfectly good. I had the 24/2, but got rid of it, as it wasn't sharp enough for me. But the 24/2.8 is another story! I wonder if you had a bad example? As a matter of fact, Erwin Puts wrote that the 24/2.8 Elmarit-R was about on par with the Nikkor. I have both, and would tend to agree somewhat; though I find the color rendition better with the Elmarit.

I've had only one 135mm Nikkor. It was an f/3.5. Pretty mediocre. Pictures just looked flat and tired. I only had the one 135, and never sampled their other 135 offerings, so can't comment beyond that. My 135mm Elmarit-R is a keeper, though!
 
Last edited:
FrankS said:
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.
Click to expand...

OK, OK, I take it back. It is a tank, except for the shutter speed control, which was flimsy on mine. OK, maybe flimsy is not the right word. Something in the linkage must have been weak. Maybe weak is the wrong word. Maybe it was slippage susceptible. Or built on a Monday or Friday. Or worthy of a design review. Maybe it got skipped over at quality assurance time.

But I already had my Leica M2, which has Never screwed up in the close to 50 years I've been using it, let alone in the mere 15 or so I'd owned it when I bought the FTn. So maybe my expectations were a tad high.

Sorry, I had not meant to shock the Nikon loyalists among us. Heck, I use them too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom