Can anyone recommend the MD-2 or MD-3 over the other...I am considering adding a motor to my F2. The MD-2 seems to be "older" and perhaps may be more prone to repairs...? The MD-3 that I am looking at sounds rather noisy. I'd like to hear from someone with first-hand experiences with these! Thanks!

-- Mark Spencer (markphoto@xoommail.com), March 17, 1999

Answers

MD3: newer, battery holders are eaiser to find/replace, slower than MD2, NO motorized rewind

MD2: battery holders are VERY hard to find, faster than MD2, motorized rewind, expensive in nice condition

Ive used a MD2 for about 2.5 years now. I like it a lot and have never had any problems with it. I found it in USER cosmetic condition without the impossible to find batter holders. I modified it to use regular AA battery holders. The motorized rewind is nice, but not required IMHO, but the MD2 looks a lot better on the F2 than the MD3. Dont buy any MD if is doesnt "sound" right.

-- sheldon hambrick (shambric@us.oracle.com), March 17, 1999.

The MD2 is heavier. It is a altogether a performer and a workhorse. I recommend it if you have not leightweight in mind. The problem of battery holder is real : they are prone to rust (quality of stainless steel and not sealed batteries of the '70) and nearly impossible to find as a spare part.

-- Dominique Cesari (cesarigd@club-internet.fr), June 29, 1999.

MD3 are prone to fail, they're made with a plastic gear. if it's not been modyfied it can easily fail and parts are no longer available for this drive. i suggest a MD2 for this reason also.

Ciao

-- roberto (pepto68@libero.it), May 30, 2002.

Mark:

Nikon makes fine equipment. The MD-3 doesn't fall into that class. I had two of them. I consider them "junk" status. I would never suggest anyone buy them. Both failed.

Art

-- Art (AKarr90975@aol.com), June 01, 2002.