How important is camera body: FM10 vs F5 ?

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Camera Equipment : One Thread

If you use the same lens, at the same exposure, with the same film, will the $200 nikon FM10 produce the same image as the $2,000 F5?

-- larry korhnak (lvk@gnv.ifas.ufl.edu), July 29, 1998

Answers

Yep!!

-- sheldon hambrick (shambric@us.ibm.com), July 29, 1998.

Hi,

Everyone will tell you that camera bodies are not as important as the lens when it comes to producing good quality pictures. A sturdy body might stand up to more wear and tear and a few hard knocks but there is no difference between the optical qualities of a "good" and a "bad" body.

Granted, given the cash I would like to go for the top of the line but it's more to satisfy my techie mentality than for optical sake!

-- Angst Man (angst@post1.com), July 29, 1998.


To the question as stated: Yes, but would you have arrived at the same exposure? And in a time frame that allowed you to capture the image? And, if while climbing the cliff to get wear you could get that shot of the eagle, when you banged you FM10 several times against rocks, would it still work? There are many, non-trivial issues that contribute to your choice of light-tight boxes.

-- Bill Allen (ballen@ms.com), July 29, 1998.

You forgot the most important elemens, the lens and the photographer! With the same lens, yes. Of course there are exceptions, and the photographer has to know how to fine tune exposure values with less inteligent metering systems (hey, even with smart ones for that matter!).

Also, the 8 fps in predictive mode of the F5 will probably increase the number of your tokens, but you can do the same with follow focus or zone focus, so...

-- Paulo Bizarro (pbizarro@expro.pt), July 30, 1998.


There are some cases where the better body will give you a sharper picture. These cases are when vibration from the body effects the shot(especially when high magnifications is used). A better body will have better dampening for the mirror(and possibly MLU) and a better damped shutter(more important with medium format when the shutters get bigger).

Finally, better bodies have features which greatly facilitate better pictures. Some of the biggies are spot meters and better finders(100% finders and grid screens are very nice).

For most shots though, the body won't make a difference.

-- Paul Wilson (pwilson@ultranet.com), July 30, 1998.



Besides cost, the choice is largely how you'll use the camera. If you're a backpacker who takes landscapes, why would you want to haul the F5's battery weight up the mountainside? On the other hand, for sports the F5 would be much the better choice. Keeping the film flat for greatest sharpness doesn't vary much from model to model. In that regard, the Contax SLR with the ceramic pressure plate and vacuum pump (RTS III?) is the only 35mm I know of that could offer a qualitative improvement.

-- Steve Singleton (singleton1@bigfoot.com), September 09, 1998.

In addition to all the factors listed above, a good camera body simply has a better "feel" than a poor one. Ever feel a Nikon F go off? A Leica M? A Hasselblad? The esthetics of a fine camera body cannot be quantified, but to a discerning photographer they mean a lot.

-- Peter Hughes (leonine@redshift.com), September 20, 1998.

Hi Larry, Ultimately it is the man behind the camera. But F5 will certainly produce better results than the FM10 as it has many more features than the FM10. Rgds Dinesh

-- Dinesh Hukmani (dineshhukmani@hotmail.com), July 31, 2001.

No.

It depends on the application. With the possible exception of sports, action, and active child photography, you can get to the same place is 99% of situations. Fast AF and a motor drive will definitely get the shot much more often in situations where there is no time for manual fiddling around. The meter in the F5 is great. But in situations where you have time to pick your shots, you are going to "produce the same image".

-- Mani Sitaraman (bindumani@pacific.net.sg), August 04, 2001.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ