Shooting with the Nikon FE and 35mm f2 lens

[PeterN]

Shooting with the Nikon FE was like going back to basics. I must admit that I found it quite enjoyable to work with one ISO value only and set shutter speed and aperture based on best guessing available light. While manual focusing is easy, even with my eyes, I must admit that I could not see the exposure "needles" properly. Best guessing worked better.

As far as IQ is concerned, I was first struck by how much sharper nowadays digital cameras are. But the more I shoot the less I care about sharpness and the more I care about expressing an emotion. Or experiencing an emotion. And shooting with this camera is fun.

The main purpose of this roll was to check if the camera was still in a good working condition. And it is! Everything worked as expected. So this camera and the lens areprobably keepers for me. I plan to use it for street photography.

Herewith some result. Nothing special (as said, this was more a test) but I thought to share the digitized versions anyway.

What are your thoughts about the Nikon FE and/or shooting film?


]

[Roland Vink]

The FE was my first Nikon camera. I later upgraded to FE2 and then FM3a which are basically the same camera with some improvements. While shooting film I never felt the need for anything else, a very well balanced camera with the features I wanted, a good balance of manual and automatic control, with no extra "fluff".

I almost always used aperture priority so I used the exposure needle only to check if the exposure was getting too slow for hand-held shots, and I would use the exposure compensation dial or exposure lock to fine-tune the exposure.

I should get my FM3a out again, I might buy some of the new Kodak Ektachrome when it re-appears, I missed it when it was discontinued. At first I didn't like that film, the colors seemed thin compared to Provia and Velvia I was using, but I later appreciated it has much better skin tones, and I came to enjoy the more delicate color rendition.

[David H. Hartman]

The FE2 had improvements over the FE but I believe the FE2 is louder due to faster shutter travel. There may be more shutter/mirror shock also. If not using the new features the FE may be preferred. The FE had a darker, coarser focus screen. If using fast lenses f/1.4~f/1.2 the old screen might be better. Otherwise one might prefer the FE2 or FM3a (FE3) focus screen.

A camera repairman friend open an FM3a and said the build quality was the same as the FE2. There were very few changes other than a few buttons. The big change was the hybrid shutter that offered manual shutter speeds with no battery. The viewfinder magnification of the FE2/FM2n was 0.86x with a 50mm at infinity. The FM3a was reduced slightly to 0.83x as I recall.

I should sue Nikon for hearing loss for using the FE2 and FM2n. $5,000.00 (USD) would be about right. I could buy a Nikon D850, spare battery, a couple of QXD cards and an AF-S 70-200/2.8E FL VR, etc. Life would be good again.

"Life is hard, then you die."

Dave Hartman

[HCS]

Quite nice Peter, even though only test shots.

Would you want an FM3a, i have one waiting for an owner who will actually use it 

[Jack Dahlgren]

Peter,

Such a nostalgic look, and it sounds like you are having fun.

I too am struck how much sharper and cleaner modern cameras are. I see why I opted to carry a TLR or Speed Graphic around in those days.

[Eddie Draaisma]

Exactly my first Nikon set; I bought a black FE with a 35/2Ai for around 1500 Dutch Guilders (EUR 680) in 1979, a lot of money then for a poor student.

In aperture priority mode I used the exposure memory lock instead of the exposure compensation dial; it is activated by pressing the self-timer release lever towards the lens.

It got noisy after mounting a MD11 or MD12 motordrive.

[Hugh_3170]

Hi Peter, nice to see you using your FE.

If you have not already done so, check out the sponge rubber mirror cushion and the fine seals around the film back. 

On some older cameras, such as my Nikkormat FT3, these can perish over time and become VERY sticky indeed and can break up into glue like chunks. Replacement cushions and seals can be got from Ebay and also Micro tools.  If the gunk gets on the reflex morror or the focussing screen it can be quite difficult to clean off.

[Fons Baerken]

Interesting results

[charlie]

Because film is not as sharp as digital it can have a more organic/natural look to it, the way one object blends into its background or the object next to it. Also I find color film can be richer & more saturated while maintaining level of realness that digital has trouble replicating, I'm particularly speaking to skin tones. My comments do not apply to all films and all film vs digital pictures of course, but enough that I still use 35mm & 120 films.

[David H. Hartman]

Because film is not as sharp as digital it can have a more organic/natural look to it, the way one object blends into its background or the object next to it.

Ever try Kodak Technical Pan? I hated the tonalities but with the right technique it offered amazing detail. Even Tri-X developed and printed right can have amazing image detail and sharpness. I have a secret formula for Tri-X (which no one ever commented on). It's a secret today as everyone who read my formula has forgotten.

Dave the Alchemist

---

For those who shoot hand held, close-up or long lenses I'll recommend the Nikon F3 over other film Nikon as the shutter and or mirror is much better dampened. I tested a bunch of my cameras and the F3, F4 and F5 were all significantly smoother and less vibration prone than the F2, FE2 and FM2n. I did not have an FE to test but I think it's slower shutter would place it between the FE2/FM2n and the F3.

Dave who would like to play slow hand

[PeterN]

Thank you very much for the valuable insights and advice!

[charlie]

Ever try Kodak Technical Pan? I hated the tonalities but with the right technique it offered amazing detail. Even Tri-X developed and printed right can have amazing image detail and sharpness. I have a secret formula for Tri-X (which no one ever commented on). It's a secret today as everyone who read my formula has forgotten.

Dave the Alchemist

I never did try Technical Pan. I don't have the secret formula so Tri-X is typically grainy for me, I wouldn't say its full of fine detail on 35mm, but that's why I use it. TMAX on the other hand I've found to be full of detail with rich blacks.

[Frank Fremerey]

Here is my first camera. Zenit 11 with Helios 44M a 2.0/58mm.

Great photos, Peter. The old equipment seems to inspire you! Which film?

The shutter did not work properly, so I worked to save some money and bought the OM-1n with Zuiko 1.4/50mm as an upgrade. Great cameras.

Then came the sad day when Olympus announced the end of the OM System and I got the FM2n with Titan shutter and 1.4/50 AI.

She served me well till 2004, 16 years and I got another one a while ago,the original was worn down.

[PeterN]

Here is my first camera. Zenit 11 with Helios 44M a 2.0/58mm.

Great photos, Peter. The old equipment seems to inspire you! Which film?

The shutter did not work properly, so I worked to save some money and bought the OM-1n with Zuiko 1.4/50mm as an upgrade. Great cameras.

Then came the sad day when Olympus announced the end of the OM System and I got the FM2n with Titan shutter and 1.4/50 AI.

She served me well till 2004, 16 years and I got another one a while ago,the original was worn down.

Thank you, Frank. I used a T-MAX 400 film (it was given to me. Good choice). The helios is an interesting lens! The camera as well

[F2F3F6]

My first Nikon was a FM2 in 1983 (before I had a Pentax MX then, a LX)...

First lens was the 2,8/55 Micro, then a 2,5/105 and the third was a 2/35 Ais. It took me about a year to get a 2,8/24 and a 4,5/300 Ai to complete my list. Wonderfull equipment.
Then came a FE2...I never got a FE but this cameras are all built with good quality and the compactness and lightweight are something I miss today with Digital cameras.

Sometimes I take my FM2T and Voigtländer 2/40 +3,5/20 to have a really lightweight travel companion !