Hi-end classic SLR with a 40. Nearly unlimited budget. What are my options?

aizan said:
You can find the meter display layouts in the manuals on Butkus. All of those cameras are great in the hand, so you can toss a coin and end up with something you’ll love.
Click to expand...

Yeah, found them. I don't get what the OM4 is doing in there tho, showing some sort of a line with LEDs? Trying to find some videos that show the viewfinder from the inside.

I as looking at size of the three, and OM seems to be the smallest, LX somewhat bigger and FM3A somewhat bigger again.

Nikon FM3a 142.5 x 90 x 58
OM 4 ti 136 x 84 x 50
Pentax LX 144.5 x 90.5 x 50

This is info from manuals. I'm, not sure how manufacturers measure these things, FM3A is almost 1cm deeper than the other two, but could that be due to protruding front of the pentaprism (where the logo is?).

I tried to find some pictures of them online, found one but it's very low resolution cache from Google and the original is gone from the forums is was posted on.
download%20%282%29.jpeg


Weirdly I don't see much difference in size between the three. I've tried to calculate volume of each camera to try to understand how they might compare.

Nikon FM3a 744
OM 4 ti 571
Pentax LX 654

This is approximate of course, volume in cubic millimeters. If we consider the biggest one, FM3a, as 100%, then OM4 is 75% of that volume and LX is 88%.

It certainly does not look like OM4 is 25% smaller then FM3a from the pictures online though.

Another way to look at it is that if OM4 is 100%, then FM3a is 130% of its' size and LX is 115%.

I also tried to understand a correlation between volume and weight and calculate some sort of an abstract value, multiplying volume by weight. Less volume is good, less weight as well (I mean less weight could equal to more plastic used, so son't work for comparing all cameras, but for these three I feels it works well).

The numbers become bloated and not necessarily indicate anything practical, but coefficients go as follows – OM4 is 0.7 and LX is 0.8 of size*weight of the FM3a.

Yeah, this is not necessarily the way to choose a camera, but all of this is a very complex way of saying that OM4 is really compact while FM3a is the biggest of the bunch.
 
There is only one measure of size to me - how they feel in my hands. None are large, and I find my OM2n a little small, the LX fine and the FM2n (don't have an FM3a) great.

YMMV!
 
Look at what pros used!
Film cameras could and do simply work forever..
Digital while giving more for less, were made for quicker replacement and update..
Any Film camera is almost certainly old, which is good, the bad one's no longer with us..
Good Luck.
 
Last edited:
The choices are many..too many.
Professionals used specific film cameras for many reasons.
Longevity, trustworthiness and quality results plus decent quick servicing.
I knew a pro who ditched his Rolleiflexes for cheaper (fraction of price).
No! Not better but the work he did down mine-shafts in South Africa were terminal..
When the Yashica TLR stopped, it was tossed.
Dust, haze,moisture and very high temperatures..
Don McCullin may have Olympus but probably more for lighter weight.
I don't think at his age (like me) into areas of extreme violence and mayhem..
Alpa is a very questionable choice, complicated and kinda back to front in use.
Yes! I have used some..
Choice of 40mm lens..why?
It's usually a pancake but my Pentax 40mm flares, my Nikon 45mm GN,
really difficult to focus plus turn in wrong direction opposite of Nikkor lenses..!?
A few millimeters longer are the almost perfect 50/55 mm lenses.
The Pentax LX has problems now, with mirror having used plastic parts..
Yes Leica M6 folk, plastic in my M6TTL includes a "plastic" spring to reset counter.
It no longer works..so maybe pick one or two, try em out and enjoy..
 
CharlesDAMorgan said:
There is only one measure of size to me - how they feel in my hands. None are large, and I find my OM2n a little small, the LX fine and the FM2n (don't have an FM3a) great.

YMMV!
Click to expand...

I 100% agree, I have always felt the OM (and Pentax MX) too small for me and the Nikon FM/E/3a series ideal, but then again I have pretty large hands.

leicapixie said:
Look at what pros used!
Film cameras could and do simply work forever..
Digital while giving more for less, were made for quicker replacement and update..
Any Film camera is almost certainly old, which is good, the bad one's no longer with us..
Good Luck.
Click to expand...

When I first got into film cameras I read a lot of people online saying this and wound up going broke on mechanical pro bodies, plenty of which failed on me, so I really take exception to this. Many of these bodies are very old now and things like adhesives, sealings, metering cells, and plastics deteriorate with age, not to mention general wear and tear, fungus, humidity, corrosion, bad lubricants - even clean looking bodies can have racked up massive shutter counts. Many cameras were designed for regular maintenance and calibration also, which for some models is no longer available.

If we shoot film cameras I think it's important to accept the difficulties of maintaining the mechanics as the price of the haptic charm...well, either that or buy something overhauled by one of the rare competent repair people or as new as possible.

As for new digital cameras, if we look only at shutter durability ratings many new cameras have obscene expected lifespans - some of the Sony A7 series are rated for 500k actuations - the legendarily durable F2 by comparison was meant for 150k, and if you only use electronic shutter there's nothing to wear out at all. On the Sigma FP pretty much the only parts you can wear out are the buttons and battery hatch.
 
There really isn't any practical size difference in those three.

When you're out shooting, you'll not be thinking about a few cubic millimeters or grams, you'll be concentrating on the subject and framing.

Assuming the cameras are all in good working order, none of these will get in the way of the process.
 
leicapixie said:
..
Don McCullin may have Olympus but probably more for lighter weight.
I don't think at his age (like me) into areas of extreme violence and mayhem..
..
Click to expand...

I can clarify that. On the book "The history of photography in 50 cameras", Maitani reported on an interview (regarding the OM1) that McCulin expressed to him how glad he was that he came across such a light camera that he could take in conflicts without carrying the burden of heavier cameras.
 
"In the following years, the OM series became a great success. For Maitani, the greatest recognition that deeply moved him was the gratitude of Don McCullin, a photojournalist working in conflict zones around the world: “I definitely wanted to meet Mr. Maitani and thank him personally. Thank you so much for liberating the shoulders of us photographers. Thanks to the lighter cameras, the scope of our activities has expanded. On behalf of all broadcast photographers across the globe, I wanted to thank you.”

The rest of the story here:
https://www.olympus.co.uk/company/en/news/stories/2019-09-03t14-55-55/story-detail-page_23040.html
 
splitimageview said:
There really isn't any practical size difference in those three.

When you're out shooting, you'll not be thinking about a few cubic millimeters or grams, you'll be concentrating on the subject and framing.

Assuming the cameras are all in good working order, none of these will get in the way of the process.
Click to expand...

But the OP wants the one that is perfect for him... and it is his $ and sometimes you just want what you want
 
Hari said:
ha ha maybe the leitz 3D camera
Click to expand...

Anyhow, I think the next step would be to research lenses and figure out which one works better for my taste and make a choice based on that.

I've shot a lot of cropped sensors/cinema cameras and my favorite lenses hands down were Distagons in 28mm which results in approx 43mm on 136 film. Distagon design provides the rendition that I absolutely love, bokeh does not get too weird since fronts are big and there's no cat's eye or swirl due to bokeh vignetting.

I realize the three lenses in question – Pentax Limited 43mm, Ultron SL or the Zuiko 40 – are not Distagons, but I'd love to get as close in terms of rendition to what I like.

Unfortunately there is no decent comparison online that would show bokeh character of all three, so I'm stuck looking through tons of Flickr shots.

I found some tests comparing the 43 Pentax and Ultron, looks like Pentax is not as sharp, but I don't care about that too much. Purple-blue CA seem to be not as nice on Ultron, but those tests were really inconclusive.
 
jsrockit said:
But the OP wants the one that is perfect for him... and it is his $ and sometimes you just want what you want
Click to expand...

Which is why he needs to get his hands on at least 2 of the 3 out of his short list, and try them out. That is the only way to know. They are all nice on paper.
 
CNNY said:
Which is why he needs to get his hands on at least 2 of the 3 out of his short list, and try them out. That is the only way to know. They are all nice on paper.
Click to expand...

I agree Christian... I was just speaking to size differences. Some people are sensitive to them, others think it is ridiculous. I'm one of those that truly believes a cameras has to feel right and not be too damn big. It's my issue.
 
May I suggest that at this point the best step would be to find a dealer with one in stock and hold the thing and so on?

What you'll see online will either be about brand new cameras or else about someone's secondhand one. The age of the camera will mean that both have to be taken with a pinch of salt...

You can get cameras in "brand new" condition but experience suggests you won't unless you go down the road of getting a technician to make one excellent one from two or three old but good ones. It has been done but costs a bit.

The meter in the OM-4 is easy to use in practice. The row of little dashes (page 26 in the handbook) light up to show the speed.

The real advantage is being able to average metering quickly by taking up to 8 spot readings and letting the camera do the sums...

Regards, David
 
Last edited:
jsrockit said:
I agree Christian... I was just speaking to size differences. Some people are sensitive to them, others think it is ridiculous. I'm one of those that truly believes a cameras has to feel right and not be too damn big. It's my issue.
Click to expand...


Exactly, it shouldn't get in the way of taking the shot; I think the word is "neutral" or something like it.


Regards, David
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom