# Old School



## BarkAtTheMoon (Mar 4, 2010)

How do these Nikon 35MM cameras hold up to todays standards?


----------



## JimmyO (Mar 4, 2010)

You could drop that from your neck onto concrete and theres a good chance it will still work, i dont think any non-pro nikon can say that


----------



## Battou (Mar 4, 2010)

Those look to be Nikon FM bodies. The FM is one the few old Nikons that actually looks good IMHO.


How do thay hold up to todays standards? 

You can decide for your self

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/general-gallery/149609-just-beast-under-your-bed.html

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/black-white-gallery/165860-chosen-place.html

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/nature-wildlife/165859-prime-realestate.html


----------



## compur (Mar 4, 2010)

What _are_ today's standards? :scratch:


----------



## Battou (Mar 4, 2010)

After posting earlier I went up and looked at my FM and it's definately not an FM...not that it's really that bug a deal, there really is not any real image quality variation between cameras from back then.





compur said:


> What _are_ today's standards? :scratch:



Todays Standards are an image that can be seen, Silly


----------



## compur (Mar 4, 2010)

Oh.


----------



## GeneGrady (Mar 5, 2010)

I have one of them. I don't use it much though. I can't seem to let it go.

Gene


----------



## jbylake (Mar 5, 2010)

Those old Nikon's as well as several Canon's that I own and still use, were built like tanks.  Unless yours has been stored in a damp garage, or sitting in saltwater for years, their build quality is as good now as they were new.

J.:mrgreen:


----------



## matfoster (Mar 5, 2010)

maybe FE or FA


----------



## Derrel (Mar 5, 2010)

The one on the left looks like an FM-2, and the black body one on the right is an FE-2; on the black camera you can see the AUTO position on the shutter speed dial, even in that small size which means it is clearly an FE-2.

The FM had NO name on its front, just a tiny FM preface on the serial number. Since the chrome body on the left has a name on the front, and that appears to be a three-letter name, and we can not clearly and with certainty see the AUTO on the speed dial, I would say the chrome body on the left is most likely an FM-2. The black-bodied camera is clearly an FE-2. Neither can be an FA, because the FA prism has the two,large white illuminator windows on the prism. (I shot F3,FE,FM,FE-2,and FM-2 from 1982 to 2001, so I'm kinda familiar with which body is which and how they look.)

Those were some really good cameras. They are simple to use,and reliable if in good shape. But they are getting older now.


----------



## compur (Mar 5, 2010)

The Nikon FM was my first "serious" camera back in the 70s and I'm still very
fond of the FM/FE series models.  I still shoot an FM, FM2 and FE2 as well
as their predecessor the Nikkormat EL. They are all wonderful cameras of 
solid construction and will give many years of reliable service with reasonable 
care. But, I wouldn't call the FM/FE series cameras tanks, they're more like 
jeeps.  I think the Nikon tanks are the Nikkormats and the F-series models.


----------



## PinPong (Mar 6, 2010)

id rather go high quality then go down to old school than to just go straight old school
this way you have more control over where you going.. 
but ya, thats old school


----------



## matfoster (Mar 6, 2010)

BarkAtTheMoon said:


> How do these Nikon 35MM cameras hold up to todays standards?


 

this is all FM or F80, i tend to forget these days
boogie | photographer


----------

