Looking at (maybe) another film system - Oly OM?

[texchappy]

I've been shooting my Nikon's lately and my son is finally interested in the Nikkormat FTn that I got for him. I have been thinking about Leica R but I noticed a picture over on the Leica forum comparing an M6 (IIRC) to one of the film OM SLR's and that got me thinking. I know I've really liked the images I've seen with Oly glass.

Don't know much about the Oly OM lines. What's a good resource to learn about them? What would be the recommended OM body/ies? What are the lenses to look for? Especially on the longer end?

And as long as I'm at it: what about the Leica R's? Same questions?

TIA,
Tony

 

[kanzlr]

Or something like a Contax 139Q? with the 45/2.8 it is smaller than my RF kit...

 

[David_Manning]

The comparison with the M body got me to where I am with the Nikon FE2. There really isn't much size difference at all...just a pentaprism. The shutter is louder, though, and the lenses are all about like a fast 50 for M mount. No biggie...I don't do much spy photography. Even my street stuff is tame and very overt.

Good luck. I thought the OM might be cool, too. I think I bought into the Nikon reputation for toughness.

 

[TXForester]

You could start on this forum.
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=80528&highlight=zuikoholic

And here
http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/olympusom1n2/

 

[FTography]

And here
http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/olympusom1n2/

More resources:
http://zuserver2.star.ucl.ac.uk/~rwesson/esif/om-sif.htm
http://zuserver2.star.ucl.ac.uk/~rwesson/esif/om-sif/mainindex.htm
http://web.archive.org/web/20110104171355/http://www.datasync.com/~farrar/zuiko.html
http://www.alanwood.net/photography/olympus/index.html
http://zuiko.com/
http://www.mflenses.com/olympus-om-zuiko-lens-list.html

Now, if I were you, I would start considering an OM-2👎 or OM-4 (Ti), depending on your budget.
Lens wise, it comes down to what you want to use the system for. There are generally two "lines" of lenses, one with 49mm and one with 55m filter threads. If you choose wisely, you can select an entire lens line up with a shared filter thread.

 

[burancap]

Don't know much about the Oly OM lines. What's a good resource to learn about them?

The Zuikoholic Thread

Already mentioned above...

 

[Tejasican]

I used a Nikon F3hp for several years, and started having trouble getting images in focus. Autofocus and I have never gotten on well so I was looking for a system to replace it (my son is taking the F3). Seeing the absolute love for the OM line here I bought an Om-1n and some glass and have been quite happy with it. The finder with a #4 screen pops and the pictures are clear. Ergonomically I have had no trouble with the shutter ring (I have arthritis) except when shooting portrait style, then it is a bit tough to grab. I may still pick up an Om-2n or an OM-4 for those times I need auto. Carrying it around all day is no problem whatsoever as the system is incredibly light and the lenses small enough to pocket an extra one. It handles very well in low light. I have been very pleased.

But then, I happened on a black enamel Leicaflex SL and 50mm 'cron (1969). There is a connection issue with the electronics but everything else works fine. The camera looked hardly used. For the princely sum of $120 I have no room complain. It is my first Leica. The finder is brighter than my OM, the focus snaps well although the lens throw is way longer. The camera is quite a bit heavier but the odd shape compensates well in the hand, although that won't help your shoulders. I am awaiting my first roll from the Leicaflex.

Both cameras are easy to use, have fantastic finders and seem to have sharp glass. I played a little with the glass from both on my Nex (not seriously testing) and my impression is that the 'cron has an edge on corner sharpness if that is important to you. I shot some pictures with both together in town last week and should be processing the Olympus roll in a couple of weeks so at that point will have prints to compare.

I don't see how you could go wrong with either camera if these are the two you are looking at.

 

[texchappy]

I love my F2 but with limited use in the left arm at the moment, lighter is better. I'm having a blast with my XP1 for close shots but don't have the length for birds etc.

 

[GaryLH]

I love my F2 but with limited use in the left arm at the moment, lighter is better. I'm having a blast with my XP1 for close shots but don't have the length for birds etc.

Why not use your existing long lenses from Nikon? Unless of course u have Olympus gas 😀

Nikon made some light weight bodies such as the "fg" or "fg20"..
http://www.dantestella.com/technical/fg.html

Also there is a Nikon to x mount adapter for your xp1. A lot of web sites sell them. Your 180 Nikon becomes a 270 due to crop factor on the APS-c sensor.

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_s...to+fuji+adapter&sprefix=Nikon+to+fuji,aps,230

http://www.cameraquest.com/adaptnew.htm

Gary

 

[texchappy]

I've got a Rainbow imaging adapter on the way so I'll report back how it works on the Fuji.

 

[oftheherd]

Or something like a Contax 139Q? with the 45/2.8 it is smaller than my RF kit...

I used to have a Contax 139Q and really loved it. I only owned one lens for it but used an adapter to use some of my many M42 mount lenses. Not as convenient as with a dedicated to the AE lens, but not really hard either. I was super impressed with the OTF auto flash. That was super good.

You will find a large dedicated group of OM users here who consider any suggestion of another camera on the order of blasphemy. I never had one but have handled those of friends and they are nice. But there are alternatives if you decide not to go the OM route.

Contax makes some really fantastic lenses. As it turns out, so does Yashica. When my Contax 139Q died, I got a Yashica FX 103. It is also small and functions well. It takes all the Y/C lenses, as well as the M42 with adapter. Yashica lenses are much less expensive. Not as sharp as the Contax lenses, but quite good nonetheless. In fact, the M42 Yashinon lenses are much better than they are usually given credit for.

 

[rhl-oregon]

I'm a longtime OM user, very very happy with the system though most of my glass is 2nd tier for speed (f2.8+). I've never gotten a bad exposure from the OM2s or the OM4, and both are as solid as the day they were built. The OM2s behaves better if you keep the battery out of it until you're shooting, perhaps.

If you want to ride bareback, so to speak, stick with an OM1. But the OM4 is rarely pricey now, and provides all the metering you'd ever want in a small SLR.

 

[redisburning]

as an OM shooter who bought into Nikon hype briefly, let me outline what made me sell my Nikon stuff:

they're MUCH bigger. my 55/3.5 AiS was considerably bigger than my OM 50/3.5
they have a very saturated color signature. I don't really like it. for color the pastel OM colors are the better for me
the cameras may look similarly sized on paper, but that doesnt reflect practice IMO. the OM-1 is just a lot smaller than Nikon's equivalent cameras

for SLRs, I like Contax's lenses and OM's system. it's just preference.

but, and this is 100% my opinion, the OM-1 is in a completely different league than the Nikkormats. It's a much more refined camera. I actually used my OM-1 at a filming to do some behind the scenes shots and it was NBD because of how quiet it is. I would normally have used my Leica but I have a roll of Acros in there and wanted to shoot color film for this one. The OM-1 is a great little camera.

 

[texchappy]

@Redisburning: I know the OM-1 is a lot smaller than my Nikon F2 so that's good. Besides the shutter, can you tell me what you mean by 'more refined'?

 

[bitfeng]

I just bought a OM-2S with 50/1.8 MiJ with $60 and couldn't be happier. It turned out the Progam mode (fully automatic) is dead but the Auto mode (actually aperture priority) plus On-the-film metering is amazing. I have a OM-1n as well but just feel it is too much to set both the shutter and aperture manually.

 

[wblynch]

Olympus OM's are the only SLR I ever owned. I bought my first in 1975 and still use it.

I have a deep love for the OM-1.

I love the metering since it is so simple and quick to use. If you get it converted for 1.55v batteries or use hearing aid batteries, there is nothing left to complain about.

I am missing only the OM-2s and OM-F in my collection and even though the OM-3 is so well constructed, I go back to the OM-1 or OM-2 most often.

I don't have any of the pricey lenses except for the 85/2.0 yet I have always been happy with what the OM gives me.

The longer lenses, 200mm or 300mm are very inexpensive. I use the 75-150 f4.0 and love it, even though it gets little love from the public.

Simple, light, rugged, elegant. That's all I need.

 

[bitfeng]

Can I ask what focusing screen you use with 75-150/4.0? I used #13 (split image) and accasionally half of the image is missing. thanks.

Olympus OM's are the only SLR I ever owned. I bought my first in 1975 and still use it.

I have a deep love for the OM-1.

I love the metering since it is so simple and quick to use. If you get it converted for 1.55v batteries or use hearing aid batteries, there is nothing left to complain about.

I am missing only the OM-2s and OM-F in my collection and even though the OM-3 is so well constructed, I go back to the OM-1 or OM-2 most often.

I don't have any of the pricey lenses except for the 85/2.0 yet I have always been happy with what the OM gives me.

The longer lenses, 200mm or 300mm are very inexpensive. I use the 75-150 f4.0 and love it, even though it gets little love from the public.

Simple, light, rugged, elegant. That's all I need.

 

[Dave Jenkins]

The Oly 65-200 f4 is a fine lens doesn't seem to be that expensive these days, if you can find one. I had one for several years and have printed 20x30s from it (Fujichrome RDP-100 slide film).

 

[sleepyhead]

It's funny - I was a Nikkormat EL user for 20 Years (in addition to rangefinders), but then all the warm, fuzzy OM hype here on RFF convinced me to sell the Nikon gear and go OM.

I tried to love the system for about 2 years, and indeed the group of fine prime lenses I bought were superb. It was the bodies I coudn't get along with (OM-1n and OM-4Ti): the om-1 finder was not as good as the nikons, and I found the OM-4 metering fiddly.

Enter a Contax RTS II + 45mm Tessar pancake.

The Contax finder is the best I've ever used, and the Zeiss lenses are very good.

The conclusion for me was that you can read all the reviews, and get all the opinions, but until you try some equipment yourself, it's difficult to know if it's a match made in heaven, or a transient infatuation.

In retrospect, I could have just stuck to my Nikkormat and been content!

 

[mfogiel]

I have bought a few SLR's recently, and Leicaflex SL2 is certainly the most pleasurable to use. It has no AE though, so is not so much indicated for fast shooting, but this has not prevented many leica R users from making great images (Salgado using Leica 6.2 comes to mind). On top of this, the R lenses are truly great, particularly the Mandler, older versions, less sharp than the APO ASPH crowd, but with wonderful OOF and generally milder contrast - great for B&W. I have seen many Olympus shots made by good photrographers, and I dislike the way they draw - there is something nervous in the backgrounds I do not swallow. Makro Elmarit 60/2.8 and pre asph Summicron 90 stand out and complement ideally an RF kit.