OM, I've become a Zuikoholic!

newspaperguy said:
Apurature priority and the loooong exposure available.

Side note: The original OM user's archive site, hosted by Tom Scales is now back on the web: http://zuikoholic.com/
Click to expand...



That makes sense ... I do like the mirror lock up on the OM-1 though!

Your combo is exactly the same as mine ... my black OM-1n also just came back from John and really is my forever SLR.

I also pair it with an OM-2n! :D
 
Same for me, but both silver. My first OM-1 was a black one; as a student needing some money, I sold it (to my eternal regret). I bought another one a few years ago, used but in perfect condition. My OM-2n was stolen and immediatly replaced with another one, bougth with the Zuiko 35-105 on it (it's not a popular lens, but I like it).

Stefan.

Keith said:
That makes sense ... I do like the mirror lock up on the OM-1 though!

Your combo is exactly the same as mine ... my black OM-1n also just came back from John and really is my forever SLR.

I also pair it with an OM-2n! :D
Click to expand...
 
Personally I prefer the OM4 over the other models. The main reason for this is the meter, it is simply wonderful. I love the spot feature, as well as the shadow/highlight selection, which can simplify tricky exposures.

The OM4 is perfectly adequate for night shots, I've taken exposures as long as 4 minutes with it. Perhaps it can go longer, but I haven't tried yet.

Another good reason to like the OM4 is that it is better sealed than the earlier cameras, and is less susceptible to dust and/or moisture penetration.

But, all of the OM cameras are wonderful, gotta get them all...
 
chippy said:
I happen to notice this pic i had sitting around has got another M lens in it as well, a 50 this time

IMG_0069.jpg
Click to expand...

That camera is magnificent!
 
pggunn said:
Welcome Andy! And I think Oscroft is right about that shelf space. If you're like most of us you'll probably end up with at least two or three more prime lenses and another body or two, or three! It's a great system and I have absolutely no regrets about ditching digital and embracing the cult of Zuiko.

Congratulations, good luck, and post a photo or two when you get a chance!

Greg
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'm well on my way. I got a 28/3.5 and the 35-70 short zoom. As soon as my wallet allows, I'll be purchasing some more primes. Recommendations?

Andy
 
Wasn't that (90/2.5) a Tamron?

Yesterday I've scanned through the first Kodak Ektar taken with my OM4. The results were on par with some of my BEST RF lenses (and better than some recently bought new ones!)
For the 85/2 I didn't expect very sharp results (after all it's a pretty old design) but I'm quite impressed about the results. Now I'm even more tense to the first film exposed with the newly acquired 100/2!
 
Your gonna LOVE the 100/2!!!!

has to be one of the very best small tele lens for 35mm format available..
 
I have a Vivitar Series 1 - the 19/35 zoom in OM mount.

It's a great lens, but almost as big as the camera. :mad:

Takes a (wait for it) 77mm filter!

[
 

Attachments

  • OM w19-35.jpg
    OM w19-35.jpg
    65.8 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
Sonnar2 said:
Anyone know a thirdparty 35mm lens for OM better than the genuine?
Click to expand...

Are you asking specifically 35mm focal length? or 35mm referring o the film format?

I don't know of any 35mm focal length lenses from third party that would be better than Zuiko 35/2 or 35/2.8.

As for other focal length, I think the Tamron 28/2.5 is just as good as Zuiko 28/2.8.
 
shadowfox said:
Are you asking specifically 35mm focal length? or 35mm referring o the film format?

I don't know of any 35mm focal length lenses from third party that would be better than Zuiko 35/2 or 35/2.8.
Click to expand...

At Olypedia, they keep saying that the 35mm focal lengths weren't as good as others, or from other companies.

I still haven't a 35. I have a 21,24 and 3x 50's (inkl. the Macro), 85, 100. If the (later designed) 28/2.8 is so much better than the 35/2.8 better I buy the 28 and take crops if needed.
 
Hi.

I ask to you, OM experts, the following.

I have a S-M-C 1,4/50, but I want to OM body. S-M-C or OM 1,4/50 + 1.100.000 on the OM body?

Thanks in advance.
Rino.
 
Both are great lenses in terms of picture quality. The Pentax lenses are cheaper, and less prone to fungus and haze. 1/3 of all later OM lenses (the later, the worse) showing this kind of problems, virtually no Takumars. Maybe it was a manufacturing problem. Check the offers to that. Some lenses are affected, some not. The 50/1.4 belongs to the affected group.
 
Sonnar2 said:
Both are great lenses in terms of picture quality. The Pentax lenses are cheaper, and less prone to fungus and haze. 1/3 of all later OM lenses (the later, the worse) showing this kind of problems, virtually no Takumars. Maybe it was a manufacturing problem. Check the offers to that. Some lenses are affected, some not. The 50/1.4 belongs to the affected group.
Click to expand...

Where did you hear this? I've been using Olympus cameras for 23 years now, all my lenses are the late 1980's/early 1990s versions and none have ever had fungus or haze. I have 17 olympus lenses. The only one I have ever heard of having problems is the 65-200 zoom.
 
Sonnar2 said:
At Olypedia, they keep saying that the 35mm focal lengths weren't as good as others, or from other companies.
Click to expand...

You believe what they say without verifying it? :)

35mm Zuiko lenses are not expensive, not even the 35/2 nowadays.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom