Oh My Goodness (digital OM)

The OM1 was the camera that drew me into photography and I still love it very dearly. It remains the best SLR I have ever used thanks to the shutter speed dial ergonomics, the beautiful shutter release, and that massive viewfinder. It is small and simple, yet very rewarding to use.
I still hold onto a 50/1.2 and a few other OM lenses because they are small and optically very good and can fit onto many camera mounts via adapters. I used them on Canon for a while but was frustrated by the Canon viewfinders.

If a full frame digital "OM1" was ever announced I would sell my M9 immediately. Considering how much I love the M9, that is one hell of a thing to say.

I do not think it will ever happen.
 
rxmd said:
Why is that a problem? The only problem might be open-aperture shots outdoors. Sunny 16 means that you'll need a fast enough shutter (1/8000 for f/1.4 outdoors) or use an ND filter, which coincidentally some newer cameras have built-in.
Click to expand...
You answered your own question. Lets say you are going to shoot a portrait with a bright back ground and the subject in shade. You'll need a ND filter or low ISO to use a wide aperture (oof background) and get a slow enough shutter speed to synch with fill flash on the subject. The other way is a camera design and expensive flash that can do the high speed synch.

Another scenario is need of wide aperture, but a slow shutter speed for some motion blur. ND filter or low ISO would both work. A built in ND filter of a least 2 stops would be nice in either scenario. Aside from the occasional inconvenience, a screw on ND can cause problems with cameras that hunt for focus in low light. I don't know how a built in ND works, so I don't know if the same problem can occur.
 
gavinlg said:
Depends - if you have a high contrast scene where highlights can easily blow out, iso 100 is slightly better. If you have a low contrast scene and want completely noise free/smooth shadows or the ability to lift the shadows without noise, iso 50 is quite a bit better.
Click to expand...

using the sensors native ISO is best. Use less, you lose dynamic range. Push it, and you also push the noise.
 
Trius said:
Minimum sensitivity of ISO 200 is too high for my taste.
Click to expand...

Earl,

These newfangled digital sensors cast a new light on ISO rating. It's trickier than film to predict thanks to the software layer where they can do anything to the raw sensor data as long as the processor's computing power still allows for responsive operation (of the camera).

I've seen a shot from my E-P2 that looks like HDR, straight out of the camera. I almost didn't believe it when I first saw it.
 
The only cause celebre of OM bodies were their gigantic VFs, something which will not be implemented in this camera for obvious reasons, so basically this will be a M43 that looks like an OM but its not really an OM... Even worse with 2x crop...

This retro madness is hilarious in a sad sort of way...
 
where some see sadness others are happy that heritage and history are not totally left on the scrapheap. the truth is these film cameras will never be re released as film cameras, so they will either be updated as modern digital takes on classics or will slowly continue to die out. i am much happier holding the digi pen or retro x100 in my hand than the cold 'modern' nex line.
 
rbelyell said:
where some see sadness others are happy that heritage and history are not totally left on the scrapheap. the truth is these film cameras will never be re released as film cameras, so they will either be updated as modern digital takes on classics or will slowly continue to die out. i am much happier holding the digi pen or retro x100 in my hand than the cold 'modern' nex line.
Click to expand...

But these gimmicky digital retros are NOT the successors of those cameras... If this was a FF OM that supported mechanical MF and had a VF the size of the original OM then maybe, but not a M43 in the clothing of an OM...

... And we're talking about cameras here not History of The Peloponnesian War, so lets keep heritage and history where they belong...
 
claacct said:
But these gimmicky digital retros are NOT the successors of those cameras... If this was a FF OM that supported mechanical MF and had a VF the size of the original OM then maybe, but not a M43 in the clothing of an OM...

... And we're talking about cameras here not History of The Peloponnesian War, so lets keep heritage and history where they belong...
Click to expand...

They are not successors because they are not made for legacy parts... I agree. However, these gimmicky retro digital cameras ARE capable of great images and in the case of the PEN, do very well against the original (except for no VF!).
 
A new m43 camera with an excellent built-in EVF and a new sensor (probably the existing 16mp Panasonic) -- I could see myself giving one a try. My first foray into m43 was an E-PL2 - which was a fine little camera. But I kept grabbing my 12mp Nikons because the sensor was better and the controls seemed so much better. (The gosh darn E-PL2 had a mind of its own!) Then the D7000 came out with that 16mp Nikon-tweaked Sony sensor and the game was over. For now.

Waiting for a really good EVF mirrorless camera with an open mind....

Nex-7 with my CV & Leica lenses may win yet....

Rest assured, my favorite camera remains my Leica IIIc...
 
claacct said:
... And we're talking about cameras here not History of The Peloponnesian War, so lets keep heritage and history where they belong...
Click to expand...

What a silly thing to say. this is a camera forum, and there is history and heritage here and in this equipment. thankfully those concepts are not limited to your personal definition.
 
claacct said:
This retro madness is hilarious in a sad sort of way...
Click to expand...

Most people chiming in this thread love OM cameras, some love *anything* OM-like, in spirit or otherwise.

If you find this hilarious, keep on laughing at us.
If you find this sad, find something else that makes you happy.

Nobody is forcing you to get it. 🙂
 
shadowfox said:
Earl,

These newfangled digital sensors cast a new light on ISO rating. It's trickier than film to predict thanks to the software layer where they can do anything to the raw sensor data as long as the processor's computing power still allows for responsive operation (of the camera).

I've seen a shot from my E-P2 that looks like HDR, straight out of the camera. I almost didn't believe it when I first saw it.
Click to expand...

Will,

Granted, but I was thinking more about maximum aperture. 😀

I should have stated that.
 
claacct said:
But these gimmicky digital retros are NOT the successors of those cameras... If this was a FF OM that supported mechanical MF and had a VF the size of the original OM then maybe, but not a M43 in the clothing of an OM...
Click to expand...

Actually, of all the companies out there building mirrorless cameras*, Olympus should be praised as they are only ones to put out a lens (12/2) that very accurately mimics a true MF operation using focus-by-wire -- distance scale and all!

I'm not sure if cameras using contrast-detect focus have to use focus-by-wire lenses, but they all seem to. We'll see what Fuji does, but I'm assuming they'll also use focus-by-wire.



*Obviously digi Leicas are mirrorless, but they don't AF so not a fair comparison.
 
Does anyone else think that using a form factor without a functional reason is lame or is it just me?

To explain: the omd will be an EVF camera, therefore it will have no pentaprism, therefore no reason for that pyramid on the top. However they will still put a pyramid on, because...? Maybe it will click open and double up as an ashtray?

Same for the mirrorbox. EVF camera = no mirror, therefore no mirrorbox. We already got the ashtray covered with the pentaprism, so maybe the mirrorbox can be a cigar cutter?
 
Well, as the saying goes, you can put lipstick on a pig but that don't make it a date. I'm pretty fed up with Olympus. Their DSLRs have been lame from start to finish, plagued by poor focusing and cheesy build. They gave us a digital "Pen" that disgraced the Pen SLR system. There's no reason to believe that a digital OM will be as innovative as the OM 35mm film system was in its day.
 
Olympus has realized it can't compete directly with Canon/Nikon and realized they need to carve out a niche. Pentax's K-7/5 produced better and smaller DSLRs, so Oly's retreated to m4/3.

The PEN is great territory if Oly doesn't mess it up, but it seems like they're already losing ground. If the digital OM system does have weather-sealing and is fast, or has a full-manual option and pancake lenses, I might consider it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom