back alley
IMAGES
tkluck said:Nine pages in six days. And without the words Leica or Nude in the topic!
YES!!
back alley
IMAGES
Rafael
Mandlerian
Very nice kit! And one body, one winder, and eight lenses in 16 days... I'm impressed!!! 
Kim Coxon
Moderator
Now get out and use it!
It might help against more GAS attacks and thoughts of another change in the RF gear.
Kim
Kim
back alley
IMAGES
Kim Coxon said:Now get out and use it!It might help against more GAS attacks and thoughts of another change in the RF gear.
![]()
Kim
this is my thinking and my hope.
whenever the urge draws near i am gonna grab the slr!
in fact, i'm thinking of paring the rf kit down by one lens and keeping it even more minimal.
physiognomy
Confirmed RF addict...
back alley said:did i ever show you guys a pic of the oly gear?click here
That should keep the thread going for a few more pages!!! Nice kit Joe... I'm working on getting together some T4/Tx slr lenses that I can use with multiple mounts.
Peter
ps How is the Series 1 19-?mm zoom? I was thinking about getting one if I ever get around to finding myself a nice 167MT.
oscroft
Veteran
Ooh, only just spotted this thread, so I'm out of the closet too - I'm an OM junkie.
I've got an OM1n, 2xOM2n, OM10, and 24/2.8, 28/2.8, 35/2.8, 50/1.8, 50/1.4 (silvernose), 100/2.8, 135/3.5, and 35-105 zuiko lenses, plus Sigma 21-35, Tokina 17, and Tamron 80-210. (I never use the 21-35 or the 17 - I use CV 15 and 21 for super wide - so I should really sell them). The 35/2.8 and the 35-105 get the most use, but I'm quite impressed by the 100/2.8 that I only got recently. What I'd really like to add to the kit now is an 85/2 and a 28-48, but they always go too high for me on eBay.
I've got an OM1n, 2xOM2n, OM10, and 24/2.8, 28/2.8, 35/2.8, 50/1.8, 50/1.4 (silvernose), 100/2.8, 135/3.5, and 35-105 zuiko lenses, plus Sigma 21-35, Tokina 17, and Tamron 80-210. (I never use the 21-35 or the 17 - I use CV 15 and 21 for super wide - so I should really sell them). The 35/2.8 and the 35-105 get the most use, but I'm quite impressed by the 100/2.8 that I only got recently. What I'd really like to add to the kit now is an 85/2 and a 28-48, but they always go too high for me on eBay.
back alley
IMAGES
i have only taken a few shots so far and with the 28.
gb hill
Veteran
First part of the year when the camera bug ressurected it's ugly head, and I got out my old Canon slr,only to be stung by that dreaded rangefinder wasp later on, I bought off ebay a 2x adapter I think it was? Well anyhow it's in my drawer. But it was susposed to be for a Canon but when I got the thing it said Olympus. To get to the point of my story and not boar you much longer, I kept the thing, telling my wife "I may get an oly someday" These darn bugs keep flying around and won't go away. Get the OFF!
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
oscroft said:Ooh, only just spotted this thread, so I'm out of the closet too - I'm an OM junkie.
I've got an OM1n, 2xOM2n, OM10, and 24/2.8, 28/2.8, 35/2.8, 50/1.8, 50/1.4 (silvernose), 100/2.8, 135/3.5, and 35-105 zuiko lenses, plus Sigma 21-35, Tokina 17, and Tamron 80-210. (I never use the 21-35 or the 17 - I use CV 15 and 21 for super wide - so I should really sell them). The 35/2.8 and the 35-105 get the most use, but I'm quite impressed by the 100/2.8 that I only got recently. What I'd really like to add to the kit now is an 85/2 and a 28-48, but they always go too high for me on eBay.
Alan: From what I've heard, forget the 85/2 and go for the 90/2 Macro instead. Not that it's cheaper (IIRC it goes for more), but it has better performance.
The 28-48 is a very seductive lens, but I've never heard anyone wax poetic over it. I'm sure it's a very good performer, but not worth the price unless you're a pure collector.
Yup, the 100/2.8 is a gem, and a great value.
back alley
IMAGES
i may go for the 100/2.8 during my next gas attack.
R
ray_g
Guest
The 85/2 has its charms: is it very small and light, uses the same 49mm filter, and it very nice for portraits, where the 90/2 can be overly sharp. The single coated 85/2 is especially nice for b/w portraiture.
The 90/2 is heavier, but very sharp. Too sharp for some portraits, unless you like the ASPH type look.
The 100/2 is even heavier. Sharper and more modern rendering than the 85/2, with its ED glass, but doesn't show every pore and hair like the macro.
The 90/2 is heavier, but very sharp. Too sharp for some portraits, unless you like the ASPH type look.
The 100/2 is even heavier. Sharper and more modern rendering than the 85/2, with its ED glass, but doesn't show every pore and hair like the macro.
FrankS
Registered User
My first peek at this thread, and I saw the photo of the gear. Nice, Joe. Now you should really get a back-up body! It would also cut down on lens changing, or for faster/slower film. 
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
Well I wasn't going to mention the 100/2 ... I'd still want the 2.8 as well, but yeah, the 100/2 is super from everything I've heard. I agree about the 85/2; given unlimited budget choice, I'd just get every focal length/speed combination AND in every iteration, i.e. silvernose, black trim, single coated, MC, MC but not marked MC, etc., etc., etc. (Cept maybe not the zoom that was a Cosina OEM. Nothing against Cosina, but the rap on that lens is it's not really worth coveting.)
My name is Earl, and I'm a Zuikoholic.
My name is Earl, and I'm a Zuikoholic.
ClaremontPhoto
Jon Claremont
Is the 28-48 expensive? It's my standard lens and I didn't pay much for it. Around 100 about twenty years ago.
tkluck
Well-known
It's not just me!
Something about the OM-1 that makes it "at home" on this forum. Perhaps it's the SLR with the most RF atributes?
Zuikoholism leads to Range Finder GAS?
I'll bet most of us focus with the split image over the gound glass portion of screen too...
Something about the OM-1 that makes it "at home" on this forum. Perhaps it's the SLR with the most RF atributes?
Zuikoholism leads to Range Finder GAS?
I'll bet most of us focus with the split image over the gound glass portion of screen too...
tkluck
Well-known
(repeating myself, from the middle of an earlier somewhat over enthused post...)
Comprehensive OM system information, and enough learned opions and references and camera porn to add considerable fuel to the discussion:
http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/olympusom1n2/index.htm
http://olympus.dementia.org/eSIF/om-sif.htm
http://f.webring.com/hub?ring=olympusom
Comprehensive OM system information, and enough learned opions and references and camera porn to add considerable fuel to the discussion:
http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/olympusom1n2/index.htm
http://olympus.dementia.org/eSIF/om-sif.htm
http://f.webring.com/hub?ring=olympusom
jshelly
Established
Does anyone else have worn corners on their OM-1? My does, and I would swear that it looks like brass underneath.
ChrisPlatt
Thread Killer
My choice for a small, quiet "RF-like" SLR is the Pentax MX.
"Excelsior, you fathead!"
-Chris-
"Excelsior, you fathead!"
-Chris-
oscroft
Veteran
That's very interesting, thanks. The 85/2 is sufficiently expensive that I'd seriously consider the 90/2 instead - should I ever see one for sale.Alan: From what I've heard, forget the 85/2 and go for the 90/2 Macro instead. Not that it's cheaper (IIRC it goes for more), but it has better performance.
That's interesting too. It's really the focal length range that attracts me (I used to have a Tamron 24-48, which certainly had its faults but I quite liked it). But maybe it's not that great - I have to confess I've never heard anyone wax poetic over it either.The 28-48 is a very seductive lens, but I've never heard anyone wax poetic over it. I'm sure it's a very good performer, but not worth the price unless you're a pure collector.
I've just developed a film from it, and I'm getting to feel that "gem" really is the wordYup, the 100/2.8 is a gem, and a great value
Share:
-
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.