 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
Follow Ups:
What's that "A" thing?M = photograph
A = snapshot
I've got about a thousand points to make here, so bear with me for a bit.I currently shoot a Nikon FE-2. I much prefer this to the FM-2n because of the TTL flash and the true match needle metering system. I find it much easier to use than the FM's diodes, and the fact that shutter speed is on one side of the screen and the diodes on the other. Slows you down. So from my viewpoint, the FM-3a should really be called an FE-3m. Despite the name, it's really an FE-2 with an expanded mechanical shutter speed range (only 1/250 in the FE-2). Most of the features of the camera are electronically based (DX, AE lock, TTL flash, electronically controlled shutter speeds in A mode, metering circuit, flash ready light, exposure compensation, etc. I have not found the FM-3a's view screen to be either brighter or "whiter" than my FE-2 in a head to head comparison. (I have a new K2 screen in mine) Nikon says they interchange with NO compensation. People who see differences probably should check their finder optical path for dust, dirt, discoloration, etc. I also checked the noise levels. They are a little different in character, but about the same level. (ears only, no SLM)
I wanted one because I love my FE-2, and I am not quite ready for digital. I am digital in a sense because of my negative and slide scanner on my PC (darkroom on a desktop). So my enlargements are digital. (like ADD CD's, I guess)
I was looking hard at the mid priced digital SLRs like the Canon Elan 7, Nikon N80, and Minolta Maxxum 7. I thought at first that it would be a start toward Digital since the lenses and flash would carry over. But then a horrible thought dawned on me. Digital cameras do not yet have low enough noise levels to allow consistent use of ISO 200 or 400 equivalent speeds. I can't or don't want to afford fast lenses for a $400 AF SLR, and the lenses I typically use are in the f/3.5-5.6 range with multipliers to extend them for the occassional long shot. Besides, I really don't like lugging 3# lenses. So in my opinion, the AF SLR does not provide a pathway to the Digital cameras. So I decided not to play, and stick with the FE-2 & FM-3a for a while yet.
In addition, Canon's move to CMOS AF sensors seems to be behind the poorer AF performance of the Elan 7 below EV 5 or so. That, and the elimination of the near IR focus assist light is a problem. Too bad, I really liked the USM lenses and the IS technology at realistic prices. The lack of AI and AIS compatibility in the N80 was a real blow. I'd have an N80 today if it had compatibility with my AI lens collection. The shift to G lenses with no aperture ring signals to me that Nikon is going the Canon/Minolta route with no backward compatibility for bodies or lenses. THe VR and "silent wave" lenses also signal a new era. Nikon is apparently a company in a transition period, a poor time to buy a product.
!txet oN
JJ
Hey, pathetic. The triggers “on insert” which search the inserted posts by “Romy” and deletes them is something that you are totally unaware, isn’t? Keep your hippocratic BS for your election campaign!Or, perhaps you are wiling to challenge me with $500 this time?
Romy, my dear child, I have NO idea what you are talking about. As you would know, if you stopped to think, I'm 3000 miles away from the adminstration and physical implementation of this board, and I haven't a single bit of information what "automatic" scripts run, or don't.If you've irritated someone that much, it's your problem, and you need to find out who that is, and deal with them. I only axe your posts when they serve to disinform or confuse, or when they are simply abusive.
JJ
:-D
Actually this is not very accurate example. I look at the progress of digital photography much more optimistic than the progress of digital audio. I have very big and well-developed theory about it.However, regarding the FM3… I do not think that digital cameras would be able to approach the same level of demands/delivery as FM2/FM3 did. No wonder the price for FM2 never dropped for 15 years. (Even used!)
After all, if it doesn't matter which, we can compare old Royal X against the best digicam available for bright light, and see what comes of it.
JJ
It is really irrelevant what influence a film would have in photography because you can’t properly interpret its influence anyway. What’s relevant is the fact that you're a member of Phony-Audio-Knowledge-Establishment and my pessimism about your (or your-like) potency to delivery (or even to reflect) any Audio Result worth of any discriminative attention.
I am not into this cat-fight,but regarding photography, as a professional photojournalist, I know the future is in digital.I have been using film since my teens,now four decades later I've accumalated drawers full of negs and slides.
With a computer hard drive I can store more than I'll ever get to.Using todays excellent EPSON printers and with a little mastery of photoshop we can turn out prints that will last from 25 - 200 years rivaling their film brethren.
It is after all the final image (print) like music, the emotions they evoke in each of us, not how it was created or medium used.
Romy I agree your love of Nikon FM 3 might have something to do with it's features and a metal body,unlike the majority of plastic crap out there.My F5's and D1's are metal as well.
What they do share is the fabulous Nikon Lens system, a combination of sharpness and unmatched versatility.
There will always remain those that like to fiddle with film chemistry or flip over an LP and lovingly remove every spec of dust (Snap ,Crackle and Pop).
The Digital age is upon us it must be embraced not fought against.
*** It is after all the final image (print) like music, the emotions they evoke in each of us, not how it was created or medium used.Well, there is Audio and there is Music, Similar to it there is Photography and there is Photography. Music dose not know about the existence of Audio as well if you communicate by Photography Language then the Method of Photography is irrelevant…
*** Romy I agree your love of Nikon FM 3 might have something to do with it's features and a metal body, unlike the majority of plastic crap out there. My F5's and D1's are metal as well.
“Metal” has nothing to do with it I think you lost what I meant
***What they do share is the fabulous Nikon Lens system, a combination of sharpness and unmatched versatility.
Just for the sake of objectivity I am not a big admirer of “fabulous Nikon Lens system”.
*** There will always remain those that like to fiddle with film chemistry or flip over an LP and lovingly remove every spec of dust (Snap ,Crackle and Pop). The Digital age is upon us it must be embraced not fought against.
And I do not see any fight. The methods of Reality transition are well known in visual art (contrary to Sound) and there are not fundamental impediments why digital should not take over the analog photography.
Not an admirer of the Nikon Lens system? Shock! Outrage! Sacrilege!Actually, it's like everything else; some great ones, some good ones, some average, and some dogs. The trick is to not buy the dogs, and to pick and choose from the best buys and "sleepers" among the others. For example, I just found a Nikon Series E 75-150 with excellent optical condition for $89.
But in the more popular ranges (leave out the $4000 and up models) I think Canon has better glass on average, as does the Minolta Maxxum line. Pentax is probably below Nikon in the AF lines, but was equal or better back in the manual focus days. For instance, the Pentax 100 f/2.8 M series is every bit as good as the famous Nikkor 100 f/2.5, and had better coatings to boot.
Conventional wisdom is to buy Nikon because of their wonderful lenses. I bought Nikon because of the wonderful FE-2 (or FM-3a) and use a mixture of Nikon, Tamron, and Vivitar Series 1 glass. Whatever works best for me.
Here's a question: At the same time Nikon is bringing out G series AF lenses and VR lenses which are increasingly incompatible with earlier MF (and AF) bodies, they bring out the new FM-3a. Does that make any sense? Schizoid management? Any thoughts?
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
