royalrat
Member
A few words should be said about the way I percept analog photography before engaging my review (or rather written experience) on this small and surprising camera. When I choose to take analog camera to my outdoor exploring, I’m usually considering the camera itself as an inseparable part of the creation. Suddenly the tool is no longer a mere gadget I operate in order to have a photo, but rather some kind of a brush and color I pick for drawing the impressionist image of my active reality. I guess it could be said also on digital, but my feeling is that the digital era brought a lot of sharp and very distinct realism to the documentary moment taken by the lens. When using my digital equipment I feel the urge to achieve the best results from the processor and lens. When living in the analog realm, the expectations from the tools in use (camera, lens and film) are at another dimension. I start looking after the little odd qualities I usually regard as mistakes or defects, and find them more appealing when staining the delicate texture of the celluloid. Again, people may claim that you can Photoshop anything today into the picture, but the analog image, even damaged and totally wacked, is something that you’re usually prefer on leaving alone and let it be as it was intended by the moment. That’s why I like old cameras, and that’s why I search for those cheap and very common cameras, worn by use but still grinding by the clicks!
By the standards I described above, the Olympus Pen EE-3 (The EE Stands for Electronic Eye) is a must-try! It is a real Lomographic camera, and I wish it will be re-discovered and used by all those fast and happy-clicker shooters. The main uniqueness this camera brings with it is the half-frame concept, introduced the first time to the world in 1959 by the Pen series, designed by Maitani Yoshihisa of the Olympus Company in Japan. The concept, scorned by many film lovers, is about using only half size of the common 35mm frame (18x24mm), and by that exploiting the film and producing more photos from the 135 cassette (72 instead of 36). Sure the product you receive has less detail (and tends to be grainy), but by playing with this unique form, you can make a conceptual use of the double frame (or triple), displayed adjusting to one another and sharing two sides of a photographic idea. I’m calling all the Lomographers among you, which regards shooting pictures as a way of exploring the far edges of the duplicated reality, to check this fabulous vintage tool for your purposes and enjoyment.
For full review and photos:
http://royalrat.wordpress.com/2011/08/15/my-photographic-time-tunnel-%E2%80%93-olympus-pen-ee3/
Last edited:
wooiloon
Member
The link is not working
farlymac
PF McFarland
Actually, the Universal Camera Corporation came out with the Mercury Half-Frame 35mm in the '30s. Then after the war, they came out with the improved Mercury II that took the standard cassette, and added a rewind switch. But the Oly's are nicer cameras since they aren't bulky like the Mercury's (the rotary shutter took up a lot of space, requiring a half-moon bump on the top to house it). I've got an EES-2, but it's basically a rusted pile of parts. Someone dunked it, and didn't get it dried out. But I've got a lookout for another one.
PF
PF
Last edited by a moderator:
Ranchu
Veteran
Good job, I like all the faces in the second pic.