[patrick9]

I had a chance to get a couple of Nikon bodies and lenses a few weeks ago after a seller reneged on a deal. I picked up an FM2 with a 24/2.8 and a 105/2.5 both AI lenses. Well since I had two lenses I thought I would look at another body. I picked up an FE. All had an issue or two .
The FM2 needed light seals
The 24/2.5 had a stiff aperture ring. Blades were clean and snappy just the ring was stiff
The 105/2.5 had a stiff aperture ring, stiff focus ring, and the focus grip was missing
The FE needed light seals.
I enjoy tinkering so I thought I'll have a go at fixing these then decide whether to keep or not. I have gotten the 24 freed up, the 105 freed up and a new grip NOT factory. I got new seals for the FM2, FE. and K-1000 . They have all been installed. New leather has replaced the old loose stuff on the FM2.
I decided that I needed something in between 24 and 105, so I purchased a 55/3.5 Nippon Kogaku micro Nikkor. Came complete with a stuck focus ring and fungus, and some sort of messy white stuff like old dried up paint on the barrel. But for the price I couldn't turn it down. This afternoon I tore into it The fungus is gone elements clean and the focus ring working. and the white crud cleaned off. I plan on making it an AIed lens next so that it will fit on both bodies .
SO I never thought I would own anything other than Pentax and now I have a whole second system that I have decided to keep . The best part is I still have less than taking the wife out to dinner and a movie invested in the entire system.
Here is the FM2 in her new skin

Attached Images

   

[stevebrot]

Looks like you need an eyecup!

Honestly though, I would love to have an FM2. In many ways it is equivalent to my Pentax KX, but just simply nicer all round. They will likely kick me out for saying that.


Steve

[dms]

For a decade the FM2 and the 55mm f/3.5, and the 35mm f/2.8 (not PC), were my main outfit--and for winter very cold/very tough conditions backpacking the FM2 and the 55mm f/2.8 (my original FM2 kit was stolen) is still the only camera I take.

BTW the Nikon type E screen is (I think) truly outstanding if you like using a grid. Wished I could get it for my Pentax dslrs.

[patrick9]

Looks like you need an eyecup!

I bought one it was in the camera bag. I got a large one and I can not open the film back with it on.
I took the FM2 out for it's first outing yesterday. The first roll is at the lab and the second one is have way thru . I took the FE out last week end. I would be hard pressed to pick one over the other at the moment. The FE has a quieter shutter for sure. The FM2 is as loud as my Pentax film cameras..
I do know they are a joy to use.

BTW the Nikon type E screen is (I think) truly outstanding if you like using a grid.

I did change the screen in the FE. It had three spots just off center that bugged me . I put another K into it. I considered an E but with my eyesight not getting better with age I needed all the help I can get for focus so I stuck with a split screen

[Kayaker-J]

You don't need an eyecup, necessarily, but it's a good idea to have the glass 'n' brass screw-in viewing port cover, which is the standard part that truly is missing here -- oh, so common a problem with used Nikons... and with Fujifilm medium format cameras, too, which share this very part in common. Hence, finding this bit cheap on eBay, e.g., tends to be an exercise in futility -- unless you cleverly notice a complete bargain body or camera bundle others seem to be overlooking which has the viewfinder assembly still intact. I bought a pair of "for parts or repair" Nikkormats to get the elusive glass discs and a few additional near-minty parts.

I have all these old models in great condition and agree with Ken Rockwell (yeah, I know) that the FE is the best of the best in *most* situations for typical advanced users of Nikon manual focus lenses. It was my very first new SLR, back in late '81: It was the ONLY "modern", affordable, compact camera that could do it all with regard to the requisite controls. Shame on Pentax here. I used it almost exclusively in exposure lock, meter & recompose mode: the FE's meter needle gives you a direct reading of dynamic range with the greatest of ease as you sweep the lens across a scene -- with the perfectly placed meter lock function ON! This easily trumps the less precise L.E.D. readouts of the FM and FM2 -- and all the popular Pentaxes! With a set-up this good, a mechanical camera just offers less by way of practical, day to day simplicity, utility, and precision... unless you have one "winterized", out of necessity, for extreme cold.

The old rumors are true, in my experience -- the FE is also somewhat better built and smoother functioning than the later FE2. The latter does gain a nominal 1/250 second flash sync speed (no small deal if you like to use fill flash often), but loses out in several other respects, as well: see K.R.'s really perceptive write up on the FE.

I also like the Nikkormat EL2 -- which is so similar in a larger body format (and contemporary with the FE). It's advantage is that the metering/shutter speed band in the viewfinder appears slightly less off to the side, making it a bit faster to use as described above for left-eyed me; or, I suppose, eyeglass users. The additional size and weight make it faster to stabilize in position as you raise it quickly to eye level for people candids and fast moving events. You need both! 😁

The Nikkormat FT-3 does everything the FM -- and basically, the FM2 -- does, with better metering utility (if not, perhaps, sensor consistency -- just a guess)... at a fraction of the cost these days. And it's better looking (the FE and Nikkormat EL2 are also better looking than the FE2, in my judgment). You just have to learn the feel of the odd shutter speed dial ring, which is awkward for Nikkormat neophytes, but can be "read" by touch.

Try an adapter for using those Takumars, folks! ...If not at full infinity focus (is that big a deal, really, depending on the lens in question and subject?). Get a flyweight, full-featured* FG-20 while you're at it, and save just short of 7 ounces in weight compared to the FE: it makes a killer briefcase or backpack walkaround combo with the Voigtlander 40mm/2.0 SLII(n) Ultron! Have fun...

* My circa 12-15+ ounce Pentaxes are SO lacking the "necessities" by comparison.

---------- Post added 08-04-14 at 02:55 AM ----------

Oh, BTW, all 55mm/f.3.5 Nikkors are not the same basic design. My Auto-Nikkor Micro (with auto-aperture compensation for using external meters or non-TTL flash) is optimized for about 1:10 reproduction ratio. It is sharper in macro than the later version, which attempts to be more a jack of all trades. See Bjorn Rorslett's Nikon lens reviews for more on this (naturfotograf.com).

[Kayaker-J]

Also, patrick9, you might assist me. Where did you obtain the camera leather and the diamond cut or 'nubby' rubber focus ring material? I need both for some projects of my own. And what's the correct glue (and a source) for the seals?

[patrick9]

@ Kayaker-J
The camera leather came from here . He has a huge selection of materials and colors.www.cameraleather.com
Pre-cut and pre-glued the installation instructions are on his website under support
As to the grip I haven't found any the exact pattern. I found an elastic wrist band from my grand daughter that was the right size and width . So I am using it . There is a gentleman over on our sister Forms" Nikonforum.com" that has given me the info on which cheap not so great zooms that have the same band I need. I just haven't gotten around to looking for one yet.
For the seals I got them from Jon Goodmanhttp://Jon_Goodman@yahoo.com
They come pre-glued ,and pre-cut. You just have to remove the backing material. They come with instructions and worked perfectly. Even comes with a tool for removing old seal material. You just need a tiny bit of Zippo lighter fluid to help with the old seal removal. I also used a couple of wooden toothpicks as well. the kits come with mirror bumper pads as well.

[Kayaker-J]

Thank you, Patrick... helpful and well described.

[ChrisPlatt]

I spent fifteen years using Nikons.
IMO the KX is nicer than the FM/FM2/FM2n, unless you need the MD-12.
OTOH the FE/FE2 is nicer than the K2.

The FM3a is the one I've always lusted after...

Chris

[Kayaker-J]

I spent fifteen years using Nikons.
IMO the KX is nicer than the FM/FM2/FM2n, unless you need the MD-12.
OTOH the FE/FE2 is nicer than the K2.

The FM3a is the one I've always lusted after...

Chris

The FE COULD feel a bit small and slightly insecure in the grip you get, on some subjective basis -- a comment you could apply to pretty much all the compact bodies. An even smaller ME Super simply fits into my mitts with fine comfort and control. I couldn't quite get on with an OM-1 back in the early '80's, dimension-wise, stability-wise. So who knew in advance, right? My view is that these days, it is a relatively straightforward matter to customize smaller cameras to your own needs, if you feel you've got a keeper. It's kind of tough to downsize a body, though! This is the age of small scale, one off, personal 'additive manufacturing'... and improved moldable stuff like Sugru. Most folks won't likely wish to do much frame burning with film these days, so the pretty nice motor drive unit you cite could be modded and re-purposed as a perimeter weighted, but still fairly lightweight grip for improved handheld stabilization, perhaps with longer, heavier lenses. This is in fact my own plan -- my MD-12 came in under $10. You certainly won't have to worry about battery drain with an FE!

I have recently found that my F2's seem *much* more "of a piece" and weildable with the F2as style Photomic finder attached... compared to a DP-12, the F2a finder, on top. You wouldn't have expected the subjective difference -- I sure didn't. Little things mean a lot. So generalizations are a little difficult.

As regards the KX, I do know that it gets high marks in the camera database. I'm left-eyed, so... a potential problem there? I know I'm fine with all my Nikons (the smallest, the FG-20, could use a little shaving back of one corner of the rewind lever's plastic end piece to accommodate my dominant eye needs -- no big deal at all. Again, a better fit for me than the slightly larger FG, as it turned out). The interchangeable, modernizable focusing screens of the FE/FM series are a useful feature, too. The view, in any case, is certainly not dark... but still nicely contrasty (unlike the bright, but much harder to focus Olympus OM-1/2n). Nikon just got all the details right; and complete. I'd think a KX guy would like the later Nikkormats. An FT-3 for your auto-indexing lenses... an FT-2 for the older "rabbit ear" classics, perhaps? [Hint: the Canon FTbn is sweet as can be -- if you can live without a split-image finder screen... an issue for me, unfortunately: darn near shockless in action, just a bit ping-y (metallic). Rockwell did a nice write-up not long ago.]

I don't know about the KX's metering pattern. Does the KX just have a "bare" match-needle system, Chris? I really appreciated having a full scale readout of the shutter speeds, especially as implemented in the FE and EL2. I do know that the tight, predictable containment of the sensitive area within the famous 12mm circle on the Nikons just works great, used as I suggested. I practically never missed an exposure with Kodachrome 25 or 64. It's hard to give up on the idea of these film stalwarts, isn't it? Keep having fun! Regards, Fred

Addendum: I've noticed a number of other film-centric posts of yours, Chris. So I am curious: What percentage of your photography would you say is still being done with film? Would you say there's a specialty for 35mm film that still trumps digital for output quality? I have a nice Fuji GS 690 II here now, which I got such a great deal on, and I'm wondering how much use my 35mm cameras might (and should) get at this point. Due to the necessity of waiting out one of life's inconvenient, but common enough forced downtime periods, I haven't been able to really break out the new K3 yet. So I'm kind of uncertain now how all the pieces are going to fit together.

[patrick9]

Oh, BTW, all 55mm/f.3.5 Nikkors are not the same basic design. My Auto-Nikkor Micro (with auto-aperture compensation for using external meters or non-TTL flash) is optimized for about 1:10 reproduction ratio. It is sharper in macro than the later version, which attempts to be more a jack of all trades. See Bjorn Rorslett's Nikon lens reviews for more on this (naturfotograf.com).

Here is my 55/3.5 The second two are pre cleaning the first is during cleaning It is now clwan and fungus free

[dms]

Seems likely the early copy you have is optimized at m=1/10, the copy you have from serial number appears to be the 1st minor revision to the original auto diaphragm model. The first [serial no 171513-211000] came out in 1966 (the non-auto came out in 1961), and yours likely shortly thereafter [serial number 211001-273153]. per Peter Braczko's book.

However, Herbert Keppler says the later 55mm f/2.8 was optimized for 1/10, and if correct the earlier ones certainly were. I recall Cooper saying the same--about the AI 55mm f/3.5 as I recall--but I cannot find my copy of his book.at the moment. Anyway I believe the 55mm f/2.8 had the moving rear group for close focus correction [forgot what Nikon calls this]. So not sure what saying it is optimized for m=1/10 means for the later f/2.8 version.

Cannot know if Keppler (and Cooper) are repeating older information. Nor does it matter for most usage--they are used as a general purpose lens with excellent macro ability. I doubt ordinary mortals could tell (if it optimized for m=1/10, or whatever)--even assuming one has several of each to test--to avoid sample-to-sample variation--notwithstanding Bjorn Rorslett's discussion [but clearly he is a specialist and likely is right].

My feeling is simply they are outstanding at m=0.5 and at infinity. Compared to the Pentax 50mm f/4 (K) at longer distances they seem sharper. Certainly the 55mm f/2.8 is, and the f/3.5 version I had was decades ago--although it seemed fine then, and my other concurrently used lens was the Alpa 50mm Kern Macro Switar f/1.8 which was (also) legendary.

[patrick9]

I am anxious to try it out. I am hoping to get a chance this weekend

[ChrisPlatt]

The FE COULD feel a bit small and slightly insecure in the grip you get, on some subjective basis -- a comment you could apply to pretty much all the compact bodies. An even smaller ME Super simply fits into my mitts with fine comfort and control. I couldn't quite get on with an OM-1 back in the early '80's, dimension-wise, stability-wise. So who knew in advance, right? My view is that these days, it is a relatively straightforward matter to customize smaller cameras to your own needs, if you feel you've got a keeper. It's kind of tough to downsize a body, though! This is the age of small scale, one off, personal 'additive manufacturing'... and improved moldable stuff like Sugru. Most folks won't likely wish to do much frame burning with film these days, so the pretty nice motor drive unit you cite could be modded and re-purposed as a perimeter weighted, but still fairly lightweight grip for improved handheld stabilization, perhaps with longer, heavier lenses. This is in fact my own plan -- my MD-12 came in under $10. You certainly won't have to worry about battery drain with an FE!

I have recently found that my F2's seem *much* more "of a piece" and weildable with the F2as style Photomic finder attached... compared to a DP-12, the F2a finder, on top. You wouldn't have expected the subjective difference -- I sure didn't. Little things mean a lot. So generalizations are a little difficult.

As regards the KX, I do know that it gets high marks in the camera database. I'm left-eyed, so... a potential problem there? I know I'm fine with all my Nikons (the smallest, the FG-20, could use a little shaving back of one corner of the rewind lever's plastic end piece to accommodate my dominant eye needs -- no big deal at all. Again, a better fit for me than the slightly larger FG, as it turned out). The interchangeable, modernizable focusing screens of the FE/FM series are a useful feature, too. The view, in any case, is certainly not dark... but still nicely contrasty (unlike the bright, but much harder to focus Olympus OM-1/2n). Nikon just got all the details right; and complete. I'd think a KX guy would like the later Nikkormats. An FT-3 for your auto-indexing lenses... an FT-2 for the older "rabbit ear" classics, perhaps? [Hint: the Canon FTbn is sweet as can be -- if you can live without a split-image finder screen... an issue for me, unfortunately: darn near shockless in action, just a bit ping-y (metallic). Rockwell did a nice write-up not long ago.]

I don't know about the KX's metering pattern. Does the KX just have a "bare" match-needle system, Chris? I really appreciated having a full scale readout of the shutter speeds, especially as implemented in the FE and EL2. I do know that the tight, predictable containment of the sensitive area within the famous 12mm circle on the Nikons just works great, used as I suggested. I practically never missed an exposure with Kodachrome 25 or 64. It's hard to give up on the idea of these film stalwarts, isn't it? Keep having fun! Regards, Fred

Addendum: I've noticed a number of other film-centric posts of yours, Chris. So I am curious: What percentage of your photography would you say is still being done with film? Would you say there's a specialty for 35mm film that still trumps digital for output quality? I have a nice Fuji GS 690 II here now, which I got such a great deal on, and I'm wondering how much use my 35mm cameras might (and should) get at this point. Due to the necessity of waiting out one of life's inconvenient, but common enough forced downtime periods, I haven't been able to really break out the new K3 yet. So I'm kind of uncertain now how all the pieces are going to fit together.

The KX SPD meter has always been spot-on for me but doesn't claim to be as strongly centerweighted as the Nikons you mention.
The readout is just like the Nikon FE in manual mode - shutter speeds, needle and translucent indicator - but along the opposite side.
Aperture readout is via an optical system that reflects marking on lens ring, just like Nikon's ADR system.
Alas if you are a left eye shooter your right eyebrow will turn off the KX meter, lest you buy a deep rubber eyecup.

I tried and rejected a Nikon FT-3 due to the shutter speed dial location.
I long fancied a Canon FTb-N but it too was a model that disappointed.
The Nikon FM2n was the loudest 35mm SLR I ever owned.
OTOH in college I dearly loved my old Nikon FTn Photomic.

The Nikon F2 is the professional camera I could only dream of owning in my youth.
They cost less than some K1000's now.
I'm currently having some fun with an F2 Photomic outfit.

I've tried medium format several times, but always return to 35mm for handling, convenience, availability and low cost.
The prohibitive cost of medium format film scanners is a complete dealbreaker for me now.

Near all my photos in recent years have been taken with film cameras.
I own a couple of interesting digital cameras but I have barely touched them.
I'm frankly just not ambitious enough to tackle the huge learning curve.
Film still works well for me, so there's little reason for me to switch.

Chris

[patrick9]

The addition of the 2 Nikons brings my total of film cameras to 6. All 35mm . All but one get used on a fairly regular basis. The ZX-7 stripped a gear so a ZX-L has replaced it in the camera bag. I was surprised at how quiet thew shutter was on the FE. Then I shot the FM2 and I believe as loud as my Pentax cameras are, It has them beat. It is LOUD. It is not for use in a Library for sure.