nongfuspring
Well-known
Some time ago I posted an advice thread asking about durable SLRs for travel and general use. Since then I opted to pop my CZ C/Y 50mm 1.4 on a Yashica FX-3. It's hardly a beautiful, quiet or pleasant camera but it is very light and hasn't let me down yet; my only quibbles are a chronic loosening of the wind on lever and the light meter has died. When at home or not travelling far I'll use a Contax body, but I'm still not confident enough of their reliability to take them on the road plus the RX is heavy. Would love an S2 but I've never seen one for a reasonable price.
At the moment I'm thinking of a wide lens (probably a 28mm). I've been looking at the Yashica ML 28mm 2.8 which is supposed to be at least as good as the CZ 28, but I'm a little put off by the size and the actual CZ 28mm I haven't really been blown away with plus it's not exactly cheap. It's had me looking at other systems, and the OM series seems like a pretty viable alternative. The 28mm 2.8 in particular is really impressively compact and just judging by ebay listings the OM bodies seem to hold up pretty well, I've yet to see a dented one (the same can't be said about the Pentax MX). I'm particularly interested in the OM1 bodies since I don't trust old electronics at all and the OM3 is way out of my price range.
There seems to be quite a few versions of the OM1, and I assume some are better than others. I'd like to probably get a later version in black, but otherwise is there anything to look out for/be aware of? Is it worth forking out more for the OM1n or MD for example?
At the moment I'm thinking of a wide lens (probably a 28mm). I've been looking at the Yashica ML 28mm 2.8 which is supposed to be at least as good as the CZ 28, but I'm a little put off by the size and the actual CZ 28mm I haven't really been blown away with plus it's not exactly cheap. It's had me looking at other systems, and the OM series seems like a pretty viable alternative. The 28mm 2.8 in particular is really impressively compact and just judging by ebay listings the OM bodies seem to hold up pretty well, I've yet to see a dented one (the same can't be said about the Pentax MX). I'm particularly interested in the OM1 bodies since I don't trust old electronics at all and the OM3 is way out of my price range.
There seems to be quite a few versions of the OM1, and I assume some are better than others. I'd like to probably get a later version in black, but otherwise is there anything to look out for/be aware of? Is it worth forking out more for the OM1n or MD for example?
Dwig
Well-known
Condition is vastly more important than the individual differences in the variants, especially when you are talking about a camera over a third of a century old.
Variants:
M-1: original name, sold in Japan only, banned from most international sales due to a name trademark clash.
OM-1: rebadged M-1 that also included some minor internal updates.
OM-1 updated to "MD": motor/winder connections retrofitted to a plain OM-1 and has no "MD" label on the body.
OM-1/MD: small transport improvements and shipped with motor/winder coupling as do all subsequent variants. This variant has an "MD" badge on the body.
OM-1n: modest internal improvements and some external handling improvements. The latter are centered on rounding sharp edges making this the only variant I would personally choose.
All of the OM-1 variants were designed to use the PX-13 or PX=625 mercury batteries which are not longer available. To use the meters now you will have to deal with one of the substitute arrangements.
Moto-Uno
Moto-Uno
My personal experience has been with OM-1n, I'd suggest holding out for one with a working light meter ( some of the joy from this small camera is not having to bring any additional equipment ). I was lucky enough to have found what must be the last new 625 battery on the planet and am pleased with the exposures. And you have to love that large bright viewfinder. Peter
Merlijn53
Established
Something to be aware of:
The sealing material used in the prism housing of the om-1 deteriorated after some time and if that happened, often the prism had to be replaced. My 1974 om-1 needed this repair about 15 years ago.
Frank
The sealing material used in the prism housing of the om-1 deteriorated after some time and if that happened, often the prism had to be replaced. My 1974 om-1 needed this repair about 15 years ago.
Frank
plummerl
Well-known
With regards to the prism, be aware that the prism from an OM-10 is a replacement for the prism in an OM-1. The OM-10 can usually be found very cheaply, especially one for parts. I did this with my first OM-1 from the 70's.
oftheherd
Veteran
The only thing Olympus I have is an OM-10. I am not crazy about it, and will probably sell it. As far as the OM-1s, many people love the idea of aperture and shutter speeds on the lens mount. Maybe if I used one enough, I would too. But I am too turned off to the idea myself. If you are sure that wouldn't bother you, go with the advice above.
For my part, I would suggest getting an FX-3 with a working meter. I also have one I got some 30 years ago for backup to my 139Q. It still works fine, although the 139Q doesn't, possibly due to having been through a house fire. On ebay, the FX-3 cameras seem to be going for very inexpensive money right now.
If you prefer more automation, you might look for some of the other Yashica cameras that sold in the F series. I also have the FX-103 which I like.
For my part, I would suggest getting an FX-3 with a working meter. I also have one I got some 30 years ago for backup to my 139Q. It still works fine, although the 139Q doesn't, possibly due to having been through a house fire. On ebay, the FX-3 cameras seem to be going for very inexpensive money right now.
If you prefer more automation, you might look for some of the other Yashica cameras that sold in the F series. I also have the FX-103 which I like.
BillBingham2
Registered User
Great info on the OM-10, I knew there had to be a use for it (;->>>
The only bad OM-1 is an OM-1 that isn't used. They are the classic late 70s early 80s camera. Almost every manufacturer moved to copy it, IMHO none did.
B2 (;->
The only bad OM-1 is an OM-1 that isn't used. They are the classic late 70s early 80s camera. Almost every manufacturer moved to copy it, IMHO none did.
B2 (;->
p.giannakis
Pan Giannakis
The OM-1n with the Zuiko 28 f/2.8 is a very compact combination. Very reliable and I love the viewfinder and the ergonomics. Finding one in good condition is very important - a CLA will sort out the battery issue and the bad foam in the prism housing.
Noll
Well-known
This sums up the main issue with older OM-1's. Chances are if you buy online, you will find this issue. While it may or may not be bad enough to ruin the prism entirely, you will still want to clean it out. This is a fairly easy problem to fix on ones own though, and there are tutorials out there on how-to.
ferider
Veteran
Find a chrome OM-1 above serial nr. 1,110,000. The serial number is on the base plate.
See below.
Roland.
See below.
Roland.
wblynch
Well-known
I would like to ask people not to tear open a working OM-10 or other OM just for the prism. There are lots of broken OM's that can serve as prism donors. (the OM-2SP and OM-40/PC seem the most often broken).
It would be a shame to kill a nice working OM - even an OM-10
By the way, all real OM's (1/2/2sp/3/4/10/20/30/40) share the same prism. I don't know about the OM-77/88/101 since I've never had one of those. OM-2000, not at all since it is a Cosina.
Also, I have experienced that a grungy prism can be cleaned and the result is almost unnoticeable.
It would be a shame to kill a nice working OM - even an OM-10
By the way, all real OM's (1/2/2sp/3/4/10/20/30/40) share the same prism. I don't know about the OM-77/88/101 since I've never had one of those. OM-2000, not at all since it is a Cosina.
Also, I have experienced that a grungy prism can be cleaned and the result is almost unnoticeable.
ravilamir
Well-known
Bill is right.
The prism can be cleaned up and due to physics laws, you would hardly notice any difference from a new prism.
No need to go and get an OM10 for its prism.
plummerl
Well-known
Unfortunately, if you can see the foam induced blotches (dark green or black) in the viewfinder, it means that the foam has eaten through the paint and aluminum coating on the prism. Cleaning will not correct this damage. Trust me. Besides, one of the great aspects of the OM (1, 2, etc.) is the view through the viewfinder. As I said, OM-10s are readily available as parts-only offers.
zuiko85
Veteran
I have an early OM-1 (non md) that had rotted prism foam. I cleaned off the gunk, feathered the edge where the aluminizing was damaged (down to bare glass) and I cannot see the difference between that body and my later md body that had the foam removed before it turned to goo. Granted, only about a 6 or 7 mm wide strip was missing at the eyepiece end of the prism but after I cleaned it up the view was unaffected. Before I cleaned it yes, you could see the affected area.
newspaperguy
Well-known
IMO the door seals are far more likely to need replacement than the prism foam.
BTW, John H. alters OMs to use modern batteries he does a CLA.
RICK OM-1MD, OM-1n, OM-2n
BTW, John H. alters OMs to use modern batteries he does a CLA.
RICK OM-1MD, OM-1n, OM-2n
nongfuspring
Well-known
Thanks for the advice everyone. Good tips re: the prism foam / replacement, I didn't realise that so many of the OMs used the same prism. I hope that I won't get a copy with the foam issue but I'm also relatively confident at tinkering. Also good tip regarding the serial number of copies that don't have any foam - I'll look for one if I can.
One other thing is to do with brassing on the black models. I noticed that on some images of the black OM1 there seems to be a silver metal under the paint (nickel?) and on others there's a more conventional brass colour. Did they change the materials for manufacture at some point and is there any difference in feel between the two versions? I'm more keen on a "brass" version since if that silver colour is nickel I'd prefer not to have it against skin for too long (allergic reactions etc.)
One other thing is to do with brassing on the black models. I noticed that on some images of the black OM1 there seems to be a silver metal under the paint (nickel?) and on others there's a more conventional brass colour. Did they change the materials for manufacture at some point and is there any difference in feel between the two versions? I'm more keen on a "brass" version since if that silver colour is nickel I'd prefer not to have it against skin for too long (allergic reactions etc.)
nongfuspring
Well-known
I'll definitely get another. It's ironic that the cheapest C/Y camera is probably the most reliable next to the S2.
I would be interested in the FX-103 but after two 139q models died on me shortly after buying them (one of them just died a second time yesterday after I thought I repaired it) I don't have much confidence in the battery dependent models of that era. It's a pity too since a lot of them are very nice to use.
f16sunshine
Moderator
The Contax RX is very reliable. I would not be surprised if it would pass a military rating.
It's heavy though excellent.
It's heavy though excellent.
David Hughes
David Hughes
Hi,
I wouldn't be too worried about the foam. It's easily repaired and the age of the camera suggests a lot else might need a bit of work here and here. Not too expensive imo to get it done professionally.
FWIW, I spent a lot of time looking for one of the first batch of OM-1's, which were only made for a few months, perhaps a year. Easily recognised as there's no provision for the motor drive. It had to be sent back to Olympus if one was to be used.
Anyway, it's a decent camera and I'm happy with it. But - a big "but" btw - I use my OM-2n far more often and it's just as I found it in a charity shop for a silly price (2 or 3 cups of coffee would cost more).
The OM-2n was a vast improvement on the OM-1 imo as you got a choice of manual or auto. Here "Auto" means aperture priority. And I'm often tempted by the spot and program versions but old age means I worry about focussing which has always been manual on all OM's.
Foam deterioration does happen but I've experience of it just once and I've had 5 or 6 OM's and I don't buy them from dealers but in flea markets etc. Iff* it's the silvering failing then that is repairable, based on normal practice for Astro. 'scopes...
Also the OM-10 and manual adapter can be a pleasant surprise and a bargain. I don't like the thought of them being wiped out by people after the prisms. I've seen several prisms, as spare parts, on ebay and in most cases they were unused from dealers stock.
Regards, David
* using "iff" in the mathematical sense...
I wouldn't be too worried about the foam. It's easily repaired and the age of the camera suggests a lot else might need a bit of work here and here. Not too expensive imo to get it done professionally.
FWIW, I spent a lot of time looking for one of the first batch of OM-1's, which were only made for a few months, perhaps a year. Easily recognised as there's no provision for the motor drive. It had to be sent back to Olympus if one was to be used.
Anyway, it's a decent camera and I'm happy with it. But - a big "but" btw - I use my OM-2n far more often and it's just as I found it in a charity shop for a silly price (2 or 3 cups of coffee would cost more).
The OM-2n was a vast improvement on the OM-1 imo as you got a choice of manual or auto. Here "Auto" means aperture priority. And I'm often tempted by the spot and program versions but old age means I worry about focussing which has always been manual on all OM's.
Foam deterioration does happen but I've experience of it just once and I've had 5 or 6 OM's and I don't buy them from dealers but in flea markets etc. Iff* it's the silvering failing then that is repairable, based on normal practice for Astro. 'scopes...
Also the OM-10 and manual adapter can be a pleasant surprise and a bargain. I don't like the thought of them being wiped out by people after the prisms. I've seen several prisms, as spare parts, on ebay and in most cases they were unused from dealers stock.
Regards, David
* using "iff" in the mathematical sense...
oftheherd
Veteran
I have heard some contents about Contax reliability. My Contax did die, but as I said, it had been through a house fire, and house fires are notoriously hard on any kind of electronics. When it worked, it was astounding.
I now have four FX 103s, since I like them so much. One to use, three for backups (done when you could get them off ebay for $10 to $20 apiece). They all still work. I particularly like the auto flash the Contax and Yashicas used. Prior to the 139Q and a TLA 20 and 30, I used flash fairly often, but almost never on auto, not even with Vivitar 283/5 nor Sunpak 522. But the auto flash in the Contax (now using a 167mt), and the FX103s, is unbelievably accurate. I have mentioned before I took photos of the inside of a burned out building one night, that were perfectly exposed. Talk about a black cat in a coal bin.
I hope you will let us know what you choose, and why, and your evaluation after using it for a while.