Marc Femenia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I have been thinking of getting a back-up body for my F3, and I had made up
>my mind on an FE-2. BUT, I have read about the FA, and seems in principle
>more complete than the FE-2.... more metering modes, more shooting
>modes....
>Despite these apparent advantages of the FA, the FE-2 is more admired than
>the FA.... and I would like to know if there is some special reason for
>that.
One paper, the FA seems better than the FE2. Handle both and I think you
will agree that the FE2 seems to be better built. I have also heard
anecdotes that the FA is indeed more fragile than the FE2. However, there
was one photojournalist, he participated on rec.photo.* and maybe this list
too, a while back who considered the FA one of his favorite cameras and this
guy has been in a lot of hairy situations.
It is my opinion that Nikon users tend to be people that choose perceived
superior build quality over superior technology. Canon people tend to be
the type to want the latest and greatest bells and whistles. If this theory
is correct, it is no surprise that the FE2 is regarded more highly than
the FA.
BTW, I fit this description of the Nikon user. EOS gear is probably just
fine, but I just didn't like the way they felt to use. In the back of my
my mind, I felt like I was wielding my old Diana camera when I handled
EOS cameras.
David Johnson
