Nikon FM10

wrote:
I'm trying to decide whether to replace my Canon FTb with a Nikon FM10. I
know that the FM10 has a reputation for being plasticky and cheaply built,
but my question is, is it _that_ bad, and from those who have handled and
used it, does it score well in terms of functionality, as a basic SLR? And
is it worth the price? (around $250 for the standard kit). Call me a luddite
but I am really only interested in manual exposure/manual film advance
camears, and the FM10 is the only SLR retailing at a price point that I can
afford. I have also heard that the FM10 kit comes with a substandard lens.
But I'm not too concerned about that as I'm hoping the Nikon name still
means something, and that, bad as it may be, I'm sure its no worse than the
equally plasticky Canon FD35-70mm 3.5-4.5 I'm using right now.

I've grown quite fond of the FTb's tank-like build and 2+ pound weight,
however my main gripe with it, other than the battery issue (although I've
found that a plastic o-ring around a relatively inexpensive hearing aid
battery works quite well), is that the microprism-only focusing screen makes
it very difficult and frustrating to focus accurately, especially for finely
detailed objects and in low light. And again I have doubts about the
efficacy of the aging CdS meter inside.

Thanks
Peter L.


FM2(n) would be the way to go for a Mechanical Nikon Body. Its the one I
use. May replace it with an FM3a to get the Auto Exposure and
electronic shutter some day. I love it for doing time exposures at
night. Does not burn expensive batteries holding the shutter open. But
you know, on eBay I am seeing F3's going for 3 to 5 hundred. Now there
is my MF dream camera.

In article ,
says...
I'm trying to decide whether to replace my Canon FTb with a Nikon FM10. I
know that the FM10 has a reputation for being plasticky and cheaply built,
but my question is, is it _that_ bad, and from those who have handled and
used it, does it score well in terms of functionality, as a basic SLR? And
is it worth the price? (around $250 for the standard kit). Call me a luddite
but I am really only interested in manual exposure/manual film advance
camears, and the FM10 is the only SLR retailing at a price point that I can
afford. I have also heard that the FM10 kit comes with a substandard lens.
But I'm not too concerned about that as I'm hoping the Nikon name still
means something, and that, bad as it may be, I'm sure its no worse than the
equally plasticky Canon FD35-70mm 3.5-4.5 I'm using right now.

I've grown quite fond of the FTb's tank-like build and 2+ pound weight,
however my main gripe with it, other than the battery issue (although I've
found that a plastic o-ring around a relatively inexpensive hearing aid
battery works quite well), is that the microprism-only focusing screen makes
it very difficult and frustrating to focus accurately, especially for finely
detailed objects and in low light. And again I have doubts about the
efficacy of the aging CdS meter inside.

Thanks
Peter L.



You should be able to pick up a Nikon FTn for under 250 if you look
around. Tank, to be sure and it is nice to be able to use a waistfinder
for certain things. Easy to find and change focus screens too. My FTn is
the only camera I really miss having owned Nikon FE, EM, Canon A1, AE-1
and EOS bodies. I now use a Pentex Spotmatic mainly becase it is light
for what it is and I love the Super Takumar lenses.

In article ,
columbotrek wrote:
But
you know, on eBay I am seeing F3's going for 3 to 5 hundred. Now there
is my MF dream camera.

Get an F4 instead of an F3. The F4 does just about everything the F3 does,
and better. The only exception is that the F3 is the only Nikon that can
meter with shift lenses in shifted position.


--
That was it. Done. The faulty Monk was turned out into the desert where it
could believe what it liked, including the idea that it had been hard done
by. It was allowed to keep its horse, since horses were so cheap to make.
-- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency

wrote in message
...
I'm trying to decide whether to replace my Canon FTb with a Nikon FM10. I
know that the FM10 has a reputation for being plasticky and cheaply built,
but my question is, is it _that_ bad, and from those who have handled and
used it, does it score well in terms of functionality, as a basic SLR? And
is it worth the price? (around $250 for the standard kit). Call me a
luddite but I am really only interested in manual exposure/manual film
advance camears, and the FM10 is the only SLR retailing at a price point
that I can afford. I have also heard that the FM10 kit comes with a
substandard lens. But I'm not too concerned about that as I'm hoping the
Nikon name still means something, and that, bad as it may be, I'm sure its
no worse than the equally plasticky Canon FD35-70mm 3.5-4.5 I'm using
right now.

There are many cameras that you should consider with 99% of them being
discontinued. I like and collect Nikons and believe one of the many
Nikkormat models would serve you much better than the FM 10. You should be
able to find a F3 with a lens in excellent condition for what you are
willing to pay and you'd end up with one of the finest Nikons ever built.
You should also consider other brands such as the Olympus Om2s and the
Pentax LX.

The used 35mm camera market is flooded with great deals today, it's a buyers
market.

wrote:
I'm trying to decide whether to replace my Canon FTb with a Nikon FM10. I
know that the FM10 has a reputation for being plasticky and cheaply built,
but my question is, is it _that_ bad, and from those who have handled and
used it, does it score well in terms of functionality, as a basic SLR? And
is it worth the price? (around $250 for the standard kit). Call me a luddite
but I am really only interested in manual exposure/manual film advance
camears, and the FM10 is the only SLR retailing at a price point that I can
afford. I have also heard that the FM10 kit comes with a substandard lens.
But I'm not too concerned about that as I'm hoping the Nikon name still
means something, and that, bad as it may be, I'm sure its no worse than the
equally plasticky Canon FD35-70mm 3.5-4.5 I'm using right now.

I've grown quite fond of the FTb's tank-like build and 2+ pound weight,
however my main gripe with it, other than the battery issue (although I've
found that a plastic o-ring around a relatively inexpensive hearing aid
battery works quite well), is that the microprism-only focusing screen makes
it very difficult and frustrating to focus accurately, especially for finely
detailed objects and in low light. And again I have doubts about the
efficacy of the aging CdS meter inside.


Just to make things even more complicated:
You might want to look at what Contax SLRs are going for now.

I can't say much about the Contax bodies, but I use the same lenses
(Zeiss) on a Rolleiflex system (also recommendable - with some serious
caveats - if you live in Europe).

If you want some of the best prime lenses, at less than Leica prices,
you might give it a thought.

My own take on lens quality (in one sentence or less): Nikon makes good
teles but Zeiss & Leitz/Leica wides are significantly better.
Exceptions, etc. exist, but that is a trend.
If you like all-manual cameras, I'd aasume you don't like zooms.

Ask if you want more clarifiaction.

wrote:
I'm trying to decide whether to replace my Canon FTb with a Nikon FM10. I
know that the FM10 has a reputation for being plasticky and cheaply built,
but my question is, is it _that_ bad, and from those who have handled and
used it, does it score well in terms of functionality, as a basic SLR? And
is it worth the price? (around $250 for the standard kit). Call me a luddite
but I am really only interested in manual exposure/manual film advance
camears, and the FM10 is the only SLR retailing at a price point that I can
afford. I have also heard that the FM10 kit comes with a substandard lens.
But I'm not too concerned about that as I'm hoping the Nikon name still
means something, and that, bad as it may be, I'm sure its no worse than the
equally plasticky Canon FD35-70mm 3.5-4.5 I'm using right now.

I've grown quite fond of the FTb's tank-like build and 2+ pound weight,
however my main gripe with it, other than the battery issue (although I've
found that a plastic o-ring around a relatively inexpensive hearing aid
battery works quite well), is that the microprism-only focusing screen makes
it very difficult and frustrating to focus accurately, especially for finely
detailed objects and in low light. And again I have doubts about the
efficacy of the aging CdS meter inside.


Just to make things even more complicated:
You might want to look at what Contax SLRs are going for now.

I can't say much about the Contax bodies, but I use the same lenses
(Zeiss) on a Rolleiflex system (also recommendable - with some serious
caveats - if you live in Europe).

If you want some of the best prime lenses, at less than Leica prices,
you might give it a thought.

My own take on lens quality (in one sentence or less): Nikon makes good
teles but Zeiss & Leitz/Leica wides are significantly better.
Exceptions, etc. exist, but that is a trend.
If you like all-manual cameras, I'd aasume you don't like zooms.

Ask if you want more clarifiaction.

wrote:
I'm trying to decide whether to replace my Canon FTb with a Nikon FM10. I
know that the FM10 has a reputation for being plasticky and cheaply built,
but my question is, is it _that_ bad, and from those who have handled and
used it, does it score well in terms of functionality, as a basic SLR? And
is it worth the price? (around $250 for the standard kit). Call me a luddite
but I am really only interested in manual exposure/manual film advance
camears, and the FM10 is the only SLR retailing at a price point that I can
afford. I have also heard that the FM10 kit comes with a substandard lens.
But I'm not too concerned about that as I'm hoping the Nikon name still
means something, and that, bad as it may be, I'm sure its no worse than the
equally plasticky Canon FD35-70mm 3.5-4.5 I'm using right now.

I've grown quite fond of the FTb's tank-like build and 2+ pound weight,
however my main gripe with it, other than the battery issue (although I've
found that a plastic o-ring around a relatively inexpensive hearing aid
battery works quite well), is that the microprism-only focusing screen makes
it very difficult and frustrating to focus accurately, especially for finely
detailed objects and in low light. And again I have doubts about the
efficacy of the aging CdS meter inside.


Just to make things even more complicated:
You might want to look at what Contax SLRs are going for now.

I can't say much about the Contax bodies, but I use the same lenses
(Zeiss) on a Rolleiflex system (also recommendable - with some serious
caveats - if you live in Europe).

If you want some of the best prime lenses, at less than Leica prices,
you might give it a thought.

My own take on lens quality (in one sentence or less): Nikon makes good
teles but Zeiss & Leitz/Leica wides are significantly better.
Exceptions, etc. exist, but that is a trend.
If you like all-manual cameras, I'd aasume you don't like zooms.

Ask if you want more clarifiaction.

Bhup wrote:

Other Nikon bodies to consider are the N8008s(F801s) and FE2. You should
easily be able to get an outfit on ebay for $250
The F801s has auto focus. both these cameras have TTL flash and a higher
flash syncalso interchangable focusing screens.
The FM10 is a very basic lightbox.



I'd second the FE/FE2.
They're fine bodies and coupled with an MD12 make a formidable package.

An F3HP with the grid focusing screen (red dot 'B', I want to say, may
be wrong) is probably the best nikon MF camera option, imo.

Take care,
Des

wrote:

I've grown quite fond of the FTb's tank-like build and 2+ pound weight,
however my main gripe with it, other than the battery issue (although I've
found that a plastic o-ring around a relatively inexpensive hearing aid
battery works quite well), is that the microprism-only focusing screen makes
it very difficult and frustrating to focus accurately, especially for finely
detailed objects and in low light. And again I have doubts about the
efficacy of the aging CdS meter inside.

I used to have an FE10, which is the is the same as the FM10 but
with aperture priority auto exposure. This camera would not be a
solution to your focusing problems. Granted, my eyes are not so
good, but I found the FE10's viewfinder so dark, I couldn't even
see to compose shots indoors.
Mark Sieving

Nikon should never have built (sorry they never built it ) I mean sell
rebadged cameras. The marketing department had an inspiration when the
development and production unit were on holiday . they called up a friend in
China and rebadge some rejected Cosinas as FM10.
-- If you want a full mechanical Nikon with a shutter system that's going to
last say 40 years go for the FM2n the one with Titanium shutters will run
without batteries in all extreme weathers. Flash Sync 1/250
-- If you just want a good Nikon just go for the FE2 has the same Titanium
shutter its a no brainer. Flash Sync 1/250 TTL
-- Just off beat another camera with a builtproof build and metering system
is the Pentax super program (or as its known in Europe Pentax Super A) along
with the pentax-A SMC 50mm F1.7 or F1.4 is just stagerering . Flash sync
1/125 TTL
-- However If you want full flexibility the Nikon F3 is a good one but the
flash connector is very odd and the flash sync is only 1/80
I have used the FE2 but still own the Super A and F3 the F3 is the least
ergonomic but has the most features and I must say the biggest range of
screens as well as the easiest screens to change no tools required!! Flash
Sync 1/80 TTL
-- You say you have difficulty in low light. If the objects are at a
distance greater than 3 feet why not go rangefinder the viewfinder is very
very bright, no blackout as the photo is taken, very very quite.same sound
level as dropping a paper clip from 1/2 inch on a wood desk! Most of the
70's rangefinders have a flash sync at ALL speeds as they are leaf shutter
so you can shoot at least one speed slower than a SLR. I can recommend out
of these is the Canonet QL G111 QL17 . oh yes the lens is very very sharp
Yes I do own Konica Auto S3 and a Minolta 7sii to compare with. I have a
friend who used QL17 for a client for a poster size print who loved the
result but was amazed and in disbelief of which camera was used. loading
the film is a lot easier and quicker than loading the Nikon FE2, F3 or
Pentax Super Program.

--
All outgoing emails are scanned with Norton Antivirus 2004
wrote in message
...
I'm trying to decide whether to replace my Canon FTb with a Nikon FM10. I
know that the FM10 has a reputation for being plasticky and cheaply built,
but my question is, is it _that_ bad, and from those who have handled and
used it, does it score well in terms of functionality, as a basic SLR? And
is it worth the price? (around $250 for the standard kit). Call me a
luddite but I am really only interested in manual exposure/manual film
advance camears, and the FM10 is the only SLR retailing at a price point
that I can afford. I have also heard that the FM10 kit comes with a
substandard lens. But I'm not too concerned about that as I'm hoping the
Nikon name still means something, and that, bad as it may be, I'm sure its
no worse than the equally plasticky Canon FD35-70mm 3.5-4.5 I'm using
right now.

I've grown quite fond of the FTb's tank-like build and 2+ pound weight,
however my main gripe with it, other than the battery issue (although I've
found that a plastic o-ring around a relatively inexpensive hearing aid
battery works quite well), is that the microprism-only focusing screen
makes it very difficult and frustrating to focus accurately, especially
for finely detailed objects and in low light. And again I have doubts
about the efficacy of the aging CdS meter inside.

Thanks
Peter L.