squirrel$$$bandit
Veteran
Well. It seems that I am stumbling backwards into the world of the Olympus Pen--I recently started using a micro 4/3 camera, and along with it bought a Pen F adapter. Since then I've found, each for $100, a 40/1.4 (love it so far) and 100/3.5 (on its way).
It's beginning to feel inevitable that I should end up with an F body. So...what to look for? Which bodies are most reliable, most useful, etc? Is it worth getting a metered one, or is the meter more trouble than it's worth? I know Robert J. does some work on these, including replacing the mirror with a more efficient one--is this worth getting done?
It's beginning to feel inevitable that I should end up with an F body. So...what to look for? Which bodies are most reliable, most useful, etc? Is it worth getting a metered one, or is the meter more trouble than it's worth? I know Robert J. does some work on these, including replacing the mirror with a more efficient one--is this worth getting done?
flip
良かったね！
I have an FV, but I have handled both the F and FT. I did not find the view significantly darker on the metered bodies, but then again, I stick with fast lenses and I reserve this camera for daytime use (using RF for night). If you get the metered model, you're pretty-much going to use 400 speed film or lower with the meter. Upshot, I would consider the metered model for convenience. Particularly so in the states, where the FV is much more. [The F is fine if you don't need a timer or meter.] Whether the metering system offered by Olympus is convenient for you is another matter entirely. If you have the hood, 1.4, and case, it's just a fantastic walk-around-camera - particularly if you like to exploit the grain of a film. I think scanning may be a bigger factor in your reaction to the output of this camera.
navilluspm
Well-known
I have a pen Ft and here are some things I noted about the meter: Olympus uses its own system - you set to shutter speed and the match a number between one and seven on the aperture with the number on the meter in the view finder. For photographers who understand aperture, this experience is a groaner, but it was intended to help those who didn't understand aperture numbers.
The other thing I have noticed is that after I take the cap off my lens, I need to warm up my meter for it to be accurate. I have to point it ar something bright, and then go back to what I orginally want to meter. If I don't do this, I noticed that I overexpose by a stop or two, but with this method get good exposure. Who knows: maybe it is just a quirk of my camera.
The other thing I have noticed is that after I take the cap off my lens, I need to warm up my meter for it to be accurate. I have to point it ar something bright, and then go back to what I orginally want to meter. If I don't do this, I noticed that I overexpose by a stop or two, but with this method get good exposure. Who knows: maybe it is just a quirk of my camera.
squirrel$$$bandit
Veteran
Ah so this is a transfer-the-setting type of meter, eh? That explains the "alternate" aperture values on the top of the lens. Honestly, this makes me think I should just go for the original, and cheaper, F, and carry my VC meter.
jmkelly
rangefinder user
I have been through five FT's to get three that worked. One came from Robert and one from Kevin Li. Of the three from eBay, two had broken film advance mechanisms (not unexpectedly - bought cheap from sellers who claimed "I don't know anything about cameras; don't know if this works..." - translation - it doesn't work 
).
I'd suggest you don't hold out for the FV. They are rare and expensive. The F model has a double stroke wind if that matters to you. The meter on the FT is not very good. One, it takes a 625 mercury cell, which means you need to buy an adapter or to install a diode to use a modern battery. Two, the meter is just a photocell behind a half-surface mirror in the reflex path - its accuracy is completely dependent on how well that mirror coating has held up over 40 years. Having opened five FTs I can tell you that four mirrors were at least partially de-silvered. Three, the photocell covers the entire frame - there is no center-weighting of any sort.
Replacing the half-surface mirror with a new front-surface one increases the VF brightness by at least one stop and probably more like two. I'm happy using a hand-held meter.
BTW - from three FTs I'm down to a more rational one: my favorite project FT was stolen and I sold my minty example to another RFF member. The one I kept has a black paint job from Robert and charcoal Griptac covering from Cameraleather. It's pretty sweet.
). I'd suggest you don't hold out for the FV. They are rare and expensive. The F model has a double stroke wind if that matters to you. The meter on the FT is not very good. One, it takes a 625 mercury cell, which means you need to buy an adapter or to install a diode to use a modern battery. Two, the meter is just a photocell behind a half-surface mirror in the reflex path - its accuracy is completely dependent on how well that mirror coating has held up over 40 years. Having opened five FTs I can tell you that four mirrors were at least partially de-silvered. Three, the photocell covers the entire frame - there is no center-weighting of any sort.
Replacing the half-surface mirror with a new front-surface one increases the VF brightness by at least one stop and probably more like two. I'm happy using a hand-held meter.
BTW - from three FTs I'm down to a more rational one: my favorite project FT was stolen and I sold my minty example to another RFF member. The one I kept has a black paint job from Robert and charcoal Griptac covering from Cameraleather. It's pretty sweet.
squirrel$$$bandit
Veteran
Pic?
You're further convincing me a plain-jane F is the ticket. I don't mind the double stroke.
fbf
Well-known
If i recall correctly, Robert did convert a few Ft into plain F (took out the meter cell and replaced with mirror) and black painted them. They look very sexy. I have seen it sold for reasonable price on ebay.
navilluspm
Well-known
The F is also a little (very little) more compact than the FT. I also read (but I don't know if it can be verified) that the FT is a little more robust than the F, that some other improvements were made more than just the meter.
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
I used to be so obsessed with this little system at one point I have four of them
After quitting my collector mode, I sold all of them and kept one black Pen FT. Meter works using EV system, and the lenses are so small it's not even funny.
Just today I use it with 40/1.4 and 100/3.5.
If I were to get one today, I'd also go for the stylish F model.
After quitting my collector mode, I sold all of them and kept one black Pen FT. Meter works using EV system, and the lenses are so small it's not even funny.
Just today I use it with 40/1.4 and 100/3.5.
If I were to get one today, I'd also go for the stylish F model.
jmkelly
rangefinder user
Yes, I took some FTs with dead meters, and put new first surface mirrors in them, which turns them into FVs. This definitely increases the viewfinder brightness (measured with a meter to almost 2 stops, compared with another FT with a good original semi-silvered mirror.)
The Fs have simpler advance mechanisms, relatively easy to service. The FTs/FVs are much more complicated, which is why when I paint them I don't paint the wind levers, as it's a major effort to remove and replace the lever.
The FTs/FVs have a central microprism which the F doesn't, so they are a bit easier to focus.
Film dino
David Chong
Pen F
Pen F
Here's another black painted Pen F by Robert Jagitsch, but with original body covering. Custom paintwork scuffs added by user
Double stroke advance is no real bother; each stroke is a little shorter than on an FT. Don't expect winding feel to be smooth & Leica-like though.
Pen F
Here's another black painted Pen F by Robert Jagitsch, but with original body covering. Custom paintwork scuffs added by user
Double stroke advance is no real bother; each stroke is a little shorter than on an FT. Don't expect winding feel to be smooth & Leica-like though.
Attachments
flip
良かったね！
2 more comments. The F prism does the split image in the donut thing, which I liked, but it was a bit view-angle sensitive. I also carry the VC meter with my FV. A bit tedious to not use a shoe, but I've seen too many broken Pen finders.
squirrel$$$bandit
Veteran
Very nice looking cameras there, y'all.
Hmm. I've never seen a Pen with with split image, the FT/FV have a central microprism but the Fs I've seen have a plain ground glass with a central circular area.