Nikon FM vs Olympus OM

[sevo]

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

Right. The earliest OM-1 samples were labelled Olympus M-1, but that name was changed when Leitz objected.

 

[68degrees]

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.

how are the OM-1 and OM-1n different?

 

[68degrees]

Its wild. I was just saying to myself the other day. Well at least I wont have to worry about SLRs anymore. Now this gas crisis.

 

[wblynch]

I have owned Olympus OM cameras since 1975. Never had a different brand of slr.

But I don't think they're better than a Nikon.

All this talk of PJ's and War Correspondents from the 1960s and 1970s is silly.

None of us will using these cameras in that manner. They are hobby and artistic cameras now. So stop with the stupid anecdotes.

Nowadays, all these old film cameras are just fun to have and to use. Like driving a 1965 Mustang or Volkswagen Bus.

I would say though that I don't like the Olympus digital '"SLR's" and having Nikon lenses would be much better considering the superiority of their DSLR's and that you can mount the old lenses directly onto them.

So there's that.

 

[Godfrey]

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.

In SLRs I started with Nikon, went to Olympus, went back to Nikon, went to Olympus again ... this over the course of 40 years. My current SLRs are a Nikon F and an Olympus E-1, my favorites.

Regards the OM-1 and FM ... Both cameras were/are excellent.

The OM series was introduced in '72-73, a new line break from Olympus' prior cameras which were almost all half-frame cameras. Their explicit goal was reduction of size, weight, and noise/shock in operations, the standard problems of SLR cameras. They were very successful bodies. I had both an OM-1 and OM-2, both were fine shooters with excellent Olympus lenses.

The FM was a re-think and downsize modernization of the Nikkormat, the FE was the same applied to the Nikkormat EL. These were always Nikon's second line bodies, not to be confused with the pro-grade F-F2-F3... series. Both lines had a long and impressive service life through succeeding models, were robust and solid, compact and light. Nikkor lenses were almost universally acclaimed through the pre-AI, AI, AI-S series.

Between the two systems, there is really little to nod in advantage to one over the other. The Nikons, to me, are a bit more robust. The Nikkor lens series through AI-S were exceptionally well made, designed to withstand the rigors of continuous professional use and 4fps motor drive operation on the pro cameras.

The OM Olympus bodies were excellent quality, a little more lightly built, offering features similar to somewhere in the middle between the FM/FE and the pro-line Fs at a lower price. The lenses were typically all excellent optically, if not as robustly built as the Nikons.

Having had, used, enjoyed, and made a lot of photos with both, my preferences tend towards the Nikons in general. I prefer the "shutter on top, aperture on lens" layout compared to the "shutter behind, aperture in front, all on the lens" Olympus layout. The viewfinders are a toss up ... both the FM/FE and OM1/2 series viewfinders are very bright and clear, and have too much magnification and too close an eye relief for my glasses. (The Nikon F3hp was the first SLR that gave me a viewfinder that I could really take in completely at a glance without having to swidge my eye around from side to side to see it all.) The Olympus was a little smoother and quieter in operation.

There are plenty of good lenses available for either. Parts and service are a little more available for the Nikon bodies, but the Olympus bodies are not far behind. There are some truly unusual rarities available in lenses for both. You cannot make a bad decision between the OM-1 and FM series, particularly at this age in time. The specific feel and layout of the two cameras, and the condition of the specific example you might be interested in, are the bottom line in determining what to buy, if your question is directed at a purchase.

I'd be happy with either. But note that my film SLR is a Nikon F, and my DSLR is an Olympus E-1. ;-)

G

 

[wblynch]

how are the OM-1 and OM-1n different?

The OM-1n had a different flash shoe and a ready light in the viewfinder for the flash (Olympus brand of course).

The OM-1n had a different wind lever and the wind mechanism was a bit rougher than the OM-1 (but not like the OM-2sp/3/4)

The OM-1n did not seem to have the prism foam rot problem. At least I haven't seen it.

I prefer the OM-1 over the OM-1n. Especially the "pre-MD" version. It seems to be the finest and smoothest of the series.

 

[68degrees]

I prefer the OM-1 over the OM-1n. Especially the "pre-MD" version. It seems to be the finest and smoothest of the series.

Thats what I wanted to know. Thanks.

 

[teleparallel]

I don't have any. But consider this: Nikkor lenses, Ai and foward can be used in high end digital Nikons, with all functions. We love film, but who knows. Also, you can get samyang, voigtlander and zeiss lenses, that will work on it. I considered an slr before, and Nikon was my choice due to these possibilities that you won't get with Olympus.

 

[kuzano]

Actually the first compact Oly SLR was an M1

Actually the first compact Oly SLR was an M1

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

But Leica complained about infringement on the trade name of their M1 rangefinder, so the Olympus M1 name was changed to the OM1.

I saw one on eBay..... The bidding went quite High.

Here is a website page devoted to the M1 from Olympus....

http://olympus.dementix.org/M-1/index.html

The Page contains a lot of information and many images. It says there were 52,000 bodies produced and as for "RARE" it says "common"

 

[Dwig]

how are the OM-1 and OM-1n different?

There are a number of internal refinements in the "n" model and some small but significant external improvements. In truth, there are 4 versions of the original OM:

M-1 - sold only in Japan and only for a short time.

OM-1 - relabeled M-1 with very minor internal changes. The relabeling was to avoid legal issues with the existing Leica M-1.

OM-1MD - internal updates to allow the fitting of a motor drive. The OM-1, though as I understand it not the M-1, could be updated to become the equivalent of the MD variant.

OM-1n - internal updates (minor) and significant alteration of several external components. Edges were softened (larger corner radii) and controls like the mirror lock received significantly more smooth rounding of sharp edges. All "n" models were compatible with the motor and winder.

 

[nobbylon]

I had a full OM1 system at one point, some of the optics are superb. The 24 2.8, 50's, 85 f2 and the 180 2.8. I sold them all for one reason, Nikon dslr. I could use all my m/f nikkors on my digital as well as film. I was never a fan of the FM series as I always used the F through to F5 and they always seemed a bit flimsy in comparison however I've recently got an FM2n and I'm starting to like it a lot. The OM's always felt flimsy to me as well. I'd say try not to have too many systems and spend on top lenses for what you have. I only use Nikon and Leica now, it's easier. Oh wait...I forgot the great Pentax K2 kit I have!

 

[Sejanus.Aelianus]

All this talk of PJ's and War Correspondents from the 1960s and 1970s is silly.

Yup! Doesn't stop them, though 😀

 

[Ronny]

I have two Olympus OM-1 with prism foam rot problem. :-( :-(

 

[ferider]

A couple of practical comments:

- when talking about reliability of Nikons vs. OMs above, people are really talking about the F1, F2, etc. Not about the FM, FE, etc., which are pretty much on par with the OMs, reliability-wise.
- location of aperture and speed dial are very different. Some love OMs, some hate OMs, due to this. Before you buy, if you can, play with one.
- No OM will show you the selected aperture in the finder.
- ALL OM1n and OM2n have the prism rot problem. Only some non-"n" bodies (John can provide the serial nr.) don't have prism foam. So either you get one of those, or have your camera CLA'ed (or remove the prism foam DIY).
- The OM2sp, and most OM3 and OM4 have battery drain issues. OM[34]T are more expensive.
- Zuiko lenses are great, I particularly like 28/2, 35/2, 50/1.4, and 180/2.8. They are noticeably smaller than the Nikkor counter parts. If you want highest optical performance get the newest versions, black rim, marked "Japan" or "Made in Japan".
- Compared to Nikon, the Zuiko lens selection is clearly limited. There are no 35 and 85/90 faster than f2, you can't use LEITAX conversions, many 3rd party lenses are not made for OM (for example the Rokinon 85/1.4), etc.

In the end, technically, it doesn't really matter what you pick. As said above, it's like choosing either VW Bus or 65 Mustang. I love my Mustang (and my OMs 🙂 ).

Roland.

 

[FrankS]

The advantage of having a collection of various cameras is that I can satisfy almost every kind of 35mm SLR brand desire, be it Nikon, Olympus, Canon, Minolta, Pentax, just by reaching into my cupboard.

 

[-Nash-]

I do like the OM system of cameras but i've noticed a sharp increase in the system's faster prime lenses. There are times when the Nikon optics are cheaper than Olympus' offerings.

I could grab a 35mm f/2 and 105 f/2.5 Nikkor for around £60 each while the Zuiko equivalents are over £100 each.

 

[zuiko85]

I have and love my OM-1's for many years. But!

Look a KEH's list of used lenses for both. There are a lot of used nikkor's available but Zuiko's for the OM are drying up fast. I already have all I want but you'll be starting from zero, something to think about.

Not all FM models have interchangeable focusing screens. I just can't abide split wedge and microprism screens. Mine have to be plain matte with grid lines. However that may not bother you at all. I'm somewhat of a crank when it comes to focusing screens. I wants what I want.

Finally, it takes a period of time to become accustomed to a system and you can't really know from others opinions if you'll like it. If you already know you like working with the FM then I'd suggest you just complete your lens setup and I think you'll be happy.

 

[N. Bruce Nelson]

Olympus M-1

Olympus M-1

Right. The earliest OM-1 samples were labelled Olympus M-1, but that name was changed when Leitz objected.

Thanks for the link! I have an M-1 that I traded a red dial Leica IIIf for when I lived in Japan. It has some prism rot, but is in used original condition. I am starting to lust after an Olympus Micro 4/3rds. hmmm.

 

[lynnb]

My first DSLR was an OM-1 and I used it heavily (by amateur use film camera standards at the time - about 1-2 rolls a week) for about 5 years. I loved it.

Then one day I buckled the baseplate while securing it to a tripod - don't ask me how...

Repair cost was significant so I decided to change to an FM. VF wasn't quite as big and bright but it felt more sturdy than the OM. A few years later I bought an FE as well. That became my favourite camera, because the aperture priority made it faster-shooting.

The OM-1 and FM are both good; the Nikons just felt to me like they were built to take a few more knocks than the Olympus.

 

[68degrees]

My first DSLR was an OM-1 and I used it heavily (by amateur use film camera standards at the time - about 1-2 rolls a week) for about 5 years. I loved it.

Then one day I buckled the baseplate while securing it to a tripod - don't ask me how...

Repair cost was significant so I decided to change to an FM. VF wasn't quite as big and bright but it felt more sturdy than the OM. A few years later I bought an FE as well. That became my favourite camera, because the aperture priority made it faster-shooting.

The OM-1 and FM are both good; the Nikons just felt to me like they were built to take a few more knocks than the Olympus.

what about lens quality. Nikkors vs Zuikos?