Nikon FM vs Olympus OM

[68degrees]

Recently there was a thread on the Best 35mm SLR. Ive always thought the FM was great but in that thread The Olympus OM was mentioned. Ive only recently become interested in Olympus and now Im have a crisis. Is the Olympus OM better than the Nikon FM? Size? Noise? Reliability? Macro lenses? Zuiko vs Nikkor? Does anyone have opinions on this. I know there are a lot of Olympus people here.

 

[splitimageview]

This will be a long thread 🙂

 

[keytarjunkie]

Recently there was a thread on the Best 35mm SLR. Ive always thought the FM was great but in that thread The Olympus OM was mentioned. Ive only recently become interested in Olympus and now Im have a crisis. Is the Olympus OM better than the Nikon FM? Size? Noise? Reliability? Macro lenses? Zuiko vs Nikkor? Does anyone have opinions on this. I know there are a lot of Olympus people here.

...............

Really?

"Better" is subjective. If the Nikon works for you, stick with it. Don't go all neurotic and wonder if there's some other SLR out there that's magically better. They're both fine, reliable cameras.

Use what works for you, not what works for other people.

 

[behyer]

"Better" is certainly subjective, but here's my two cents' worth anyway. The FM was created as Nikon's answer to the OM series from Olympus. I always kinda liked the FM (I shot Olympus), and it compares nicely to the OM-1 (both are no-frills, manual exposure). It's got a nice motor drive for it (faster than the Olympus winder but not as fast as the Olympus motor drives) and it seemed pretty durable.

Then Nikon came out with the aperture-priority FE, presumably to answer the OM-2 (which had been out quite a while by the time the FE appeared).

Still, though, the OMs seemed to be a little more refined, especially the OM-2. The shutter is buttery-smooth, very quiet, and the off-the-film-plane metering in the OM-2 was simply unmatched by anyone at the time.

Comparing lens systems, I had numerous instances where I could compare my Zuiko glass to equivalent Nikkor lenses (I shot a lot of sports) and it was really only then that I realized how much better the Zuiko lenses were. I would venture a guess that Nikkor glass has improved immensely since then (the 1980s).

I'm comparing similar-vintage cameras and lenses, of course, and things change. If you include the OM-4 (or better yet, the OM-4 T), then Olympus wins in a walk. Fantastic metering system, great accessories, elegant feel.

 

[FrankS]

There is no clear winner. Some people simply prefer one over the other for subjective reasons. Certain cameras click with some people and not others. For me, Olympus cameras feel more delicate and less robust than most Nikons and Nikkormats, but that's just me.

 

[sevo]

(...) the off-the-film-plane metering in the OM-2 was simply unmatched by anyone at the time.

It was the only SLR implementation at the time. But it was licensed from Minolta (where it had been used in the CLE), who in their turn bought the technology in from Pentacon.

 

[dabick42]

Olympus OM or Nikon FM ?

Depends on how much use you intend to put it to.

I've owned OM1 and OM2 in the past, but not for long.

They are small and light, yes, but sturdy, well-built and longlasting ? - not particularly. They don't bounce so well as Nikons.

Ask yourself this - why were Nikon F/F2/FM/FM2/F3 slr cameras and lenses the choice of most professionals for so many decades ?

Here in the UK, the OM1/OM2s were looked upon as hairdressers' cameras by hard-shooting serious photographers. Says it all, really.

YMMV, though....

 

[Marihino]

...

Here in the UK, the OM1/OM2s were looked upon as hairdressers' cameras by hard-shooting serious photographers.
...

Some of those hairdressers took rather decent pictures though - like David Bailey, Don McCullin or Jane Bown, to name but a few.

 

[kuzano]

OM is a great camera ... but

OM is a great camera ... but

There's a reason it did not find favor in the professional marketplace.

I've owned a number of OM Olympus and I shoot Olympus DSLR now, alongside a brace of OM's. Particular reason on my part is that I have always considered Oympus THE innovator in the camera market place, and I prefer the smaller size. Also, all my experience with Olympus has been good.

However, that has been a problem with Olympus that curtailed a lot of professional interest.

Olympus did have a contract to supply camera's to one of the larger press corp's in the seventies. Most of those journalists and professionals had been using Nikons supplied by the Press corp. When the Press corp handed out the new Olympus OM's it did not take the photographers long to figure out they could not throw the Olympus' around like they could the old Nikon's. That became, for those photographers, a reliability issue as opposed to a care/treatment issue. It was probably well founded, but I seem to recall that Olympus was only able to make perhaps one or two of these contracts.

It has been said that many of the photographers went back to their Old Nikons, or replaced the Olympus' with Nikons purchased with their own money.

My personal experience has always been good in the reliability area, but I am not hard on any of my camera's. Perhaps if my employer always supplied the camera's my care and treatment may have been different as well.

 

[dabick42]

@ Marihino...

Olympus paid Bailey to use (and be seen using ) their cameras, and I bet McCullin was damned glad he was wearing a Nikon F when that bullet headed his way... (!)

 

[maitani]

I love both sytems,

the OM system has slightly smaller lenses

the FM bodys are slightly more robust

quality of the lenses is what matters, and they are both about the same, each system has it's gems and classics.

other than that, it's just a thing of ergonomics which works best for you

 

[Fuchs]

Olympus OM1 wins in terms of compactness. OM Zuikos have fantastic quality, but their production has been discontinued long ago. Maybe in the early 1990's? Most Nikkor lenses OTOH are still in production, albeit the major part of them under AF reincarnations, but still compatible with every Nikon body. So, you can buy them new even today if you wanted to.
I find the FM/FM2/FM2n LED meter display is easier to use than the Olympus needle in poor light.

 

[KoNickon]

I love the Olympus finder; about the brightest I've ever used, and better coverage than the FM/FE. I think the Nikon bodies are sturdier -- electronics (i.e. meter) on the OMs don't seem to work as well after all this time. Lenses are pretty great optically with both, though I do think the Nikkors are more solidly made. Certain features on each camera are just great: I love the lens release button on the Zuikos; the DOF preview lever on the Nikons; the film wind feel of the Nikons; the sound of the Oly shutter; the Oly rewind lever. I don't like the fact the flash shoes for the Olys are weak, or the way the Olympus leatherette tends to peel up. The OM-1 takes the 625 battery.

The OM-1 and -2 and the Zuiko lenses are just beautiful to look at; wonderful proportions. The Nikons/Nikkors are less so, but it's their utter reliability that is attractive with them.

I could live with either, if forced to, but if I had to choose I'd go with an FM.

 

[Marihino]

dabick42, Nikon FM or FE is not Nikon F. Yes, Bailey may have been paid for using Olympus, but he probably wasn't suffering while doing so. I once got paid to be using certain brand of bass guitars. Was it a sacrifice? No, they were my instruments of choice anyway. Wouldn't use them even if paid, if they weren't a perfect tool for my artistic expression. Yes, the bullet was stopped by the Nikon. Does it mean that Olympus wouldn't stop the bullet. And even if it wouldn't, does it make it a worse camera? Is it a camera's job, to stop bullets? Remember that McCullin switched to OMs after the bullet incident.
I'm not saying OM-1n is better that FM, or OM-2n better than FE. Yes, I shot with OMs, then tried the FMs, then decided to go back to OMs. My personal choice. The viewfinders are better in OMs. Ergonomy is personal, I preferred it in OMs too. Both systems have some brilliant lenses, and other ones are at least good.
I just don't agree with statements like the one you've made - "Nikons are/were used by the pros, Olympuses by the hairdressers". Modern cameras, today, yes. Back then, no, and I provided evidence for this.
Both are great and the OP will be happy with either. Especially if he tries both and chooses one that feels better for him.

 

[sparrow6224]

OM is a system that has four generations of camera -- OM4T is very different from OM1. FM is just one Nikon model. What you're really comparing is OM series vs Nikon's FE, FM, FE2, FM2, FA, FM3A. That said, Olympus wins in metering and viewfinder (although FA matrix metering is pretty darn good). Nikon wins hands down durability. Olympus lenses are hit and miss, yes, some gems, but some pretty mediocre stuff too. Nikon lenses have gems and less-than-gems but almost all better than average. Also a far greater selection of lenses.

Handling? Personal preference. I have owned the OM3, OM4 and now own (and love) OM2n. But I own many Nikons including FE, FM2n, and FM3A. Sitting here at my desk I'm comparing the OM2n and the FM2n.... better VF in the Olympus, slightly more coverage (negligible difference really, but undeniably a bit more). Film advance is groovier in the FM2n.

The Fm2n is a mercedes diesel. The OM is something fancier and less reliable, a Jaguar perhaps.

 

[sevo]

Yes, Bailey may have been paid for using Olympus, but he probably wasn't suffering while doing so. I once got paid to be using certain brand of bass guitars. Was it a sacrifice? No, they were my instruments of choice anyway.

Well, this probably was not so in the case of Bailey - outside publicity shots, there is not much evidence of him often using a Olympus (and even less so a Samsung NX, his latest endorsement). By the time Olympus hired him for their publicity, he had pretty much left small format in his work, and most at work shots made then or later show him with medium and large format cameras - or a Nikon.

 

[shadowfox]

Man, just wait until you tried Canon FD lenses and cameras,
And watch out for those solid Minolta SR and SRT and Rokkor lenses,
And don't forget the sparkling Konica Hexanon AR lenses, all you need is to get a hold of a black Konica T3 and you're set,
And dem Pentax MX, LX, those SMC Takumars, wow, they really sing,
And those Topcon R, RE, D, DM, ... heck especially the B and C models, those are handsome, rugged and nice,
And ...

Welcome to the club, the well is deep 🙂

 

[68degrees]

... Yes, the bullet was stopped by the Nikon. Does it mean that Olympus wouldn't stop the bullet. And even if it wouldn't, does it make it a worse camera? Is it a camera's job, to stop bullets?...

ahhahah this is gold!! LMAO. If it stops bullets its a more versatile camera. hahahahahhahhaa oh ho.. this is great.. ahaha


I have the FM. I always wanted one but couldnt afford one so I got the Minolta X-700 which I loved but stilll longed for the FM. This was all back when I was 15 in the 80s. I saved up paper route money and got ax x-700

In the past year I got an FM for the first time. (I had forgot about wanting one until I saw what one could buy on ebay).

I love the FM but when I look at the film I shot when I was 15 with the x700 rokkor lenses, I can notice a difference and this is on film that is from the 80s. So I paused. When I started reading about Olympus glass I became intrigued... Maybe the nikkor glass isnt all that. I mean the minolta pics are noticeably better. IDK maybe film was better then. Anwyay. Id like to try the Olympus OM and see for myself. I would want to try a 20mm or 24mm, 55 macro if there is one, 135 tele and long 300mm tele.

 

[68degrees]

OM is a system that has four generations of camera -

Oh ok. so there is no Olympus OM. Its OM1 OM2 etc?

 

[Marihino]

There's OM-1 (and OM-1n) and OM-2n - that's first generation. OM-1👎 is purely mechanical, only uses battery for lightmeter. Just like Nikon FM. OM-2n has the same manual mode as the OM-1, but also has an aperture priority mode with the off-the-film metering. Note that the shutter in this one is electronic and won't work without battery.
Later generations consisted of OM-3, OM-4, OM-3Ti and OM-4Ti. I've never had any of these.

There was also a "double digit" series, cheaper: OM-10, -20, -30 and -40.