nikon fm3a review

Have a picture of Nikon FM3a 35mm SLR camera?, please send it to us.
 

Average Ratings

Photograph Quality	10/10
Features	9.1/10
Ease of Use	9.2/10
Value for Money	8.4/10
Reviewer Rating	9.2/10
Overall Rating	9.3/10

93% Recommended13 out of 14 Reviews

Quick Links

Write your review

Review of Nikon FM3a 35mm SLR camera

• Previous
• Review 9 of 14
• Next

By Garland. on 24th Nov 2002

Garland.'s Ratings

Features	8/10
Value for money	5/10
Overall value	6/10
Garland.'s recommendation

Good Points

Compact design is durable and ergonomic for small-to-medium-sized hands. Fit and finish are excellent. Film chamber is well protected against dust and moisture intrusion. Admirable feature set. Battery independent shutter.

Bad Points

Center weighted meter not heavily enough center-weighted for critical use. Lack of a spot metering option in a camera of this cost and capability is, to my mind, a serious shortcoming. The viewfinder analog match needle metering display, not being illuminated, is rendered useless when a dark area falls upon the left edge of your composition - great idea to offer the added precision and control of match needle metering, but very poor execution. Dim viewfinder with consumer lenses; just adequate with higher-speed optics. Probably quite a bit overpriced.

General Comments

Owned an FM3A for about three weeks before I sold it and picked up an F100. I loved the camera's size, features, and capability overall, but could not reconcile the lack of a spot meter. I shoot a great deal of transparency film under difficult conditions and was quickly frustrated with not being able to accurately meter specific distant areas, particularly in landscapes. Alas, I then soon sold the F100 for its battery-hungry disposition, poor film chamber isolation, and plethora of unnecessary features (for my style of shooting) sold my Nikkor lenses as well, the AF Nikkor zooms in particular for their relatively low optical performance and too-abrupt manual focusing (due to the short helicoids needed to acheive fast AF speeds), which is how I tend to use them most. Now using Contax equipment with Zeiss T* primes (28 f/2, 50 f/1.4, 135 f/2.8), a Sigma macro (until I can afford the Zeiss), and a Yashica 80-200 f/4 telezoom, any of which put to shame similar Nikon (or Canon or Minolta, for that matter) offerings. In short, the FM3A is a fine camera for the purist used to working exclusively with 60/40 centerweighted metering. However, overall it's a bit pricey and limited in metering options for the rest of us. Somewhat of a bad miscalculation, I fear, for Nikon. A mint condition FM2(N) would likely prove a far more satisfying and useful purchase for 95% of users, at a substantial savings.

9 Comments on Review by Garland. for Nikon FM3a 35mm SLR camera

1. Bob. on 11th May 2003

   I don't think it's a very fair or balanced review. I feel Garland didn't give his nikon much of a chance, as anyone who would rate a Yashica 80-200mm f/4 zoom over the Nikon AIS 80-200mm f/4 zoom equivalent needs to review his slides again (and yes, i've owned both). If you want clearly better performance than Nikon MF lenses, you're going to need medium format. And that FM3a will be clicking away in a new owner's hands long after Garland's troublesome Contax SLR has quit for the last time!

2. Garland. on 17th May 2003

   To be fair, Bob, I don't torture any of my equipment, despite a decade of nearly constant shooting, and I've never had a modern camera body fail me for any reason. That being said, given the choice between a camera with a better user interface and more metering options, allowing more precise control over exposures and thus greater potential for a higher percentage of properly exposed images, but with possibly less longevity; and a camera likely to last longer, but giving me less metering precision and, consequently, a lower percentage of satisfying images, I'll happily take the body (and system) offering greater control and more metering options. As for the matter of optical quality, int he 35mm format, it's entirely subjective at the level of Canon/Minolta/Nikon, with Leitz and Zeiss occupying the rare air above. With all due respect to Bob's preference of the Nikkor 80-200/4 AIS (which, by the way I also have used quite extensively), I personally do find Yashica's 80-200/4 produces more appealing images.

3. Bob. on 9th Jun 2003

   So Zeiss and Leica occupy 'the rarefied air above' Nikon and others? Man how many times have I heard that. But Garland's review of the F100 seems to indicate a conflict on whether or not this is actually true:
   
   "However, having experienced an array of Nikkors, I must conclude this reputation is based upon the performance and build quality of the earlier manual focus Nikkors, WHICH INDEED OFFER OPTICAL PERFORMANCE AND CONSTRUCTION ON PAR WITH ZEISS OF GERMANY...I prefer manual focus Nikkor lenses for their precision and performance"
   
   AND, as to that Yashica 80-200mm, it is SOFT. Even the Yashica users group have no respect for it - check out what two other owners said:
   
   "I have found that the Yashica 80- 200mm f4 lens is soft at the 200mm end.”
   
   “Don't touch the Yashica 80-200 ml zoom. I had one years ago. It was my very first zoom and I thought it great until I looked at the results after a summer holiday in Norway very soon after I bought it. It was 'soft' - lovely for contra-jour photos of children playing in hay meadows but no pleasure otherwise”
   
   As to the reliability of Contax versus other brands, a recent study shows Nikon the most reliable body, with Contax at the very bottom.

4. Barry Campfield. on 18th Jun 2003

   I don't get this review, unless it's meant only as a means to dump on an otherwise good camera and justify a move to another brand. If the lack of a built-in spotmeter is so crucial to one's needs, why the heck get an FM3a in the first place - presumably the reviewer examined the camera first?
   
   As to the viewfinder speed display, it's very easy to read, I've never had any trouble seeing the display even over dark objects. Also, the reviewer apparently didn't think to use the AE lock to freeze the speed display, then simply turn the camera to a bright light source or other area of the sky for reading. Pretty simple. The FM3a viewfinder isn't dim by any stretch of the imagination - with the interchangeable B3 screen I can see clearly even with slow telephoto lenses in poor light.
   
   Furthermore, any review based on only three weeks of use couldn't possibly reveal the FM3a's other huge advantage if you plan to venture out-of-doors - reliable performance and extreme durability. The people who would like the FM3a aren't enamored with the current habit of constantly repairing one's cameras. Overpriced? That's hard to swallow given the current prices demanded for cameras like the Contax. And, is it worth it to you to spend $450-500 and get something that will last and need few or no repairs, or spend the same and get something that needs a $125 repair after a month's use? For myself, I'd much rather have a dependable camera like the FM3a with a meter that works than a shoddily built one with lots of options that doesn't or is always in the shop. If I may point out the obvious, a camera that needs frequent repair isn't out in the field taking photographs. The FM3a is one of the only reliable, all-metal SLRs available new today that isn't loaded with failure-prone CPU processors and LCD displays. Wouldn't that fact alone give it a high ranking for bucking the throw-away trend? Guess what happens when an LCD "Command Center" display dies after 5 years and there's no replacement? That's right, you throw the camera away!!

5. Garland. on 20th Jun 2003

   A review, unless it is simply a verification or evaluation of technical specifications, is inherently skewed toward its writer's priorities. The fact that despite it's all-metal construction and all-mechanical shutter, I prefer the Contax Aria (or virtually any other camera, all-electronic or otherwise, with a spot meter, for that matter) is nothing more than a reflection of my own preferences. Likewise, my preference for the optical characteristics of Yashica's 80-200/4 over Nikon's. If you disagree with the priorities which inform my review, fine. Realize this and move on to one which shares your particular sensibilities, for only from that commonality will one find any value. To feel the need to assail another's opinion–which, after all, is what the great majority of these reviews (mine included) amount to–betrays a certain weakness in one's own. And don't presume that just because the majority shares your opinion that it is inherently more "right" as it's a statistical reality that a thing's popularity is more accurately a testament of its mediocrity than its excellence.

   
   
   

   Furthermore, if one can't evaluate in three week's time a piece of photographic equipment for its suitability to his or her photographic needs and desires, then that person either hasn't the time for much shooting or lacks the understand basic photographic principles to make the assessment. Personally, I'd rather dedicate the time and energy to acquiring a piece of equipment myself and deciding if it works for me than rely on someone else's opinions. And thanks to eBay, if as in the case of the FM3A the equipment just doesn't "fit" me, I can get rid of it with very little, if any, money lost.

   
   
   

   Lastly, though I've often read of myriad, ominous component failures in modern electronic cameras, I can't say that any of the dozen's I've owned over the years have every had a single failure that wasn't due to outright abuse of the type that would threaten even the stoutest of mechanical equipment as well. And, despite most manufacturer's admittedly conservative declarations, LCD screens typically don't die at the five-year mark. Neither does the average fickled consumer doesn't keep a camera body that long. Simple fact is, the quality of your images will be determined more by how well your equipment meets your needs and how proficient you are in using it than whether or not it's electronic or fully manual or any other such triviality.

6. Bob. on 20th Jun 2003

   A review is only valid if it's sincere. I think Garland sincerely doesn't like the FM3a, but understandably a review is open to skepticism when one expresses diametrically opposed viewpoints. You can't praise Nikon lenses as equal to Zeiss in one review, then announce their inferiority to Zeiss in another without someone wondering why! And Garland is certainly entitled to his opinion on a camera, but others are also entitled to evaluate and comment on it, which is why I decided to comment!

7. Garland. on 22nd Jun 2003

   Bob, you seem to miss the distinction I made between AF (autofocus) Nikkor zoom lenses which in my experience have relatively low optical performance compared to AF Canons, MF & AF Zeiss, Leitz, and MF (Manual Focus) Nikkors, and MF Nikkors in general, which in terms of resolution in contrast, in my opinion, are the equal of Zeiss lenses, although in though terms of more subjective criterion such as smoothness of defocused areas, are inferior to both Zeiss and Leitz lenses. And considering that the FM3A is a virtual repackaging of the FE2, with only the hybrid shutter control mechanism and not so much as even a modest restyle to distinguish it, I can't understand the perspective that it's not at least moderately overpriced. The body castings and a great deal, if not all of the mechanicals, after all, have been in existence for more than two decades, and have long since been paid for by the two previous generations of FM cameras.

   
   

   And, duh, it's not hard to imagine I don't particularly like the FM3A for what, in my opinion, are appreciable shortcomings. Otherwise, I'd still own the darned thing. But don't try to cast my review as either contradictory, generally dismissive of Nikon, or unappreciative of the virtues of a high-quality, fully mechanical camera as, in conclusion, I fully endorse the FM2(N) as, again in my opinion, an overall better example of that breed of camera at a much more attractive price. In fact, I also recommend the FM3A as a fine choice for a specific class of photograher, to which the other reviewers clearly belong. Considering that Bob and many of you others can't seem to overemphasize the durability and longevity of the FM design, I'd imagine, despite your apparent affinity for the FM3A, you'd be hard-pressed to deny that at nearly half the cost, a clean, used FM2(N) is clearly the better value.

   
   

   If there are perceived inconsistencies and/or contradictions in my review, they are the result of Bob's apparent lack of proficiency at comprehending what he reads. Or perhaps it is simply a predilection for ignoring details which do not fuel his fervor against dissenting opinions of his obviously beloved FM3A.

8. Garland. on 22nd Jun 2003

   Finally, I seem to have missed Bob's own review of the FM3A. It's disappointing to think he might not actually have much of his own to say about it, or perhaps can't string together enough cogent, original thoughts to comprise a significant evaluation.

9. johnhenry on 6th Mar 2004

   If this reviewer did own this camera for all of three weeks, he certainly didn't learn how to use it properly. None of the criticisms he has made here are an obstacle to good pictures provided the controls are properly learnt. If you want a spotmeter, buy one, but don't use that as an excuse to criticise a truly excellent machine such as the FM3a!

Narrow Your Search

• Nikon Fm3a Review
• Nikon Fm3a Test

Expand Your Search

• Grays of Westminster
• Mini Engine
• Secondhand Cameras
• Nikon F3
• Nikon F5 Camera Case
• Medium Format Slide Projectors
• Nikon F4
• Nikon Macro Lens
• Jessops
• Nikon Coolpix

Would you like to see a review that's not being listed?

Web Results

Nikon FM3a 35mm SLR camera reviews and best prices in 35mm SLR ...
Read Trusted and Unbiased reviews of Nikon FM3a 35mm SLR camera in 35mm SLR Cameras Compare Nikon FM3a 35mm SLR camera in Film Cameras at Review Centre.
www.reviewcentre.com

Nikon FM3A SLR Camera - Index Page
So, in February 2001 at the PMA show in Orlando, Florida, Nikon brought us the all new Nikon FM3a - the third generation SLR camera model of the Nikon FM series.
www.mir.com.my

Interchangeable New Focusing Screens for Nikon FM3A
The Nikon FM3A comes with a new group of interchangeable focusing screens. Different types of focusing screens can be used with this camera.
www.mir.com.my

Nikon FM3A - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Nikon FM3A is an advanced semi-professional - professional level, interchangeable lens, focal plane shutter, 35 mm film, single-lens reflex (SLR) ...
en.wikipedia.org

Photo Solution Low Price USED Digital Cameras Binoculars Accessories ...
Best prices in Digital SLRs Used Cameras Accessories Film Flashes Tripods Binoculars Telescopes TomTom MP3 Players Electronics Lenses cheap ...
www. photosolution .co.uk

APOGEE PHOTO MAGAZINE: Nikon FM3a Camera Review
Regardless of where you draw the comparisons, the Nikon FM3a is a new camera in its own right that seems destined to turn heads. ... Let's wait to see how long Nikon chooses to produce the FM3a.
www.apogeephoto.com

Nikon FM3A Reviews
... nikkor, Nikon FM3A Reviews - PhotographyReview.com is the leading resource of quality consumer-generated product reviews on the Internet.
www. photographyreview .com

Nikon FM3a @ joshmadison.com
The back of the FM3a has a film window, instead of the film back holder of the FM2n. It is released by Nikon's standard of pulling up on the ...
www.joshmadison.com

Nikon FM3A - - PopPhotoDecember 2002
Nikon FM3A...
www.popphoto.com

Compare Prices and Read Reviews on Nikon FM3A Body Only 35mm Film ...
Epinions has the best comparison shopping information on Nikon FM3A Body Only 35mm Film Camera. Compare prices from across the web and read ...
www.epinions.com