OM, I've become a Zuikoholic!

[philosomatographer]

I have mixed feelings about the OM-3. It seems like a lot of money for a camera that doesn't really cut it against an OM-2 and has little over an OM-1 aside from spot metering and an extra shutter speed!

I'm not saying I wouldn't have one though but the money they go for is a little crazy ... especially if they're mint!

The viewfinder..! don't forget the viewfinder! An OM-3 (or OM-4) with a 2-series screen puts even the OM-1/OM-2 viewfinder to shame in terms of clarity, it really is better than any rangefinder (e.g. my pristine M3 pales in comparison).

That, and on OM-3Ti is an object of pure lust. It is toolmaking and art combined like no other. So few were made, the high price is more than justified. I really do view my cameras just as "tools" to produce the pictures I like, but the 3Ti can make one just sit and stare at it, it's so pretty. It has a sort of minimalism about it - together with that unique finish - that is very different (and possibly prettier) to the fine industrial gestalt of a Leica M3 or a Linhof Technika.

 

[ooze]

Roland, that bear looks dangerously close, even with a 180mm 😱

 

[philosomatographer]

Roland, I love the stark simplicity, and depth, of this image. Since it's basically impossible to blow the highlights of Ektar film, I would have loved a slightly different post-processing (or scan) to not clip the white on the bear (looks a bit like a digital capture - ugh!) but the elements in the image really work together, especially the fine vegetation.

Any more images from Alaska? I really want to go there (I live in sunny/dry South Africa)...

 

[jmilkins]

Fabulous Roland. These jumped out of Flickr at me and now I'm going to go find the Alaska thread and keep enjoying the place from my study! thanks for posting them.

 

[ferider]

Roland, I love the stark simplicity, and depth, of this image. Since it's basically impossible to blow the highlights of Ektar film, I would have loved a slightly different post-processing (or scan) to not clip the white on the bear (looks a bit like a digital capture - ugh!) but the elements in the image really work together, especially the fine vegetation.

Any more images from Alaska? I really want to go there (I live in sunny/dry South Africa)...

Thanks a lot for the feedback, Dawid. You're right, I went a bit overboard with contrast after scanning .... I tried again, and hope it's better now:

My color (OM) galleries from Alaska are in http://ferider.smugmug.com/Picture-a-Week/2011/0911-B/19149594_x7hjwN, and B+W shot with Leica, Tmax and Rodinal in http://ferider.smugmug.com/Picture-a-Week/2011/0911-A/19149592_dcsRTM.

Best,

Roland.

 

[EthanFrank]

Roland, much better!

Cheers,

 

[redisburning]

The viewfinder..! don't forget the viewfinder! An OM-3 (or OM-4) with a 2-series screen puts even the OM-1/OM-2 viewfinder to shame in terms of clarity, it really is better than any rangefinder (e.g. my pristine M3 pales in comparison).

I've been on the lookout for quite a while and haven't seen one for sale separately.

 

[shadowfox]

Forgive the cross-post from my Alaska thread. I figured they might be of interest, since some of the photos below were taken with the "lowly" 35/2 🙂. The tele is the 180/2.8. On a freshly CLA'ed OM2 (thanks, John), and Kodak Ektar:

Cheers,

Roland.

"lowly"... "lowly??!!?"

Now I know you're out to hurt my feelings there, Roland. 🙂

 

[Field]

A couple from me I actually like.

 

[kidpluto]

i aint no joke by kPluto, on Flickr

OM2n, 85mm/f2.0

 

[Jockos]

I had an ad out, that I was looking for a 21/3.5, so this old gentleman contacted me saying he had a 24/2.8 for a very good price.
He also offered me to buy the rest of his OM system for next to nothing, and now my apartment is full again 🙁

On the bright side tough, I now have a black OM 4, black OM 2n, another 135/3.5, one more 50/1.4 MC, 24/2.8, 35/2, Tokina 28-70/3.5-5.6, Tokina 80-200/2.8, 4 bags, a tripod and loads of other small thingys, filters and such.

The OM 4 is a keeper and the 80-200 seems nice (for a zoom), but the rest is probably going away.

 

[philosomatographer]

The very very very first image I ever printed in the darkroom was from an Olympus OM negative, and I still have (and treasure) the print:

(Olympus OM-1n, 50mm f/1.4 @ f/11, Ilford FP4+, 5x7in darkroom print)

The enlarger came with a filed-out negative carrier, and I have occasionally used it - border and all - ever since, but I try not to over-do it (only works for some images). Anyway, my OM-1 + 50/1.4 accompanied me on our honeymoon, and captured many treasured memories.
​

 

[Jockos]

I tried all of the lenses on the OM4, just a quick roll, and the 80-200 was nice (albeit heavy and VERY unbalanced on the OM body), but the 35 didn't impress.
I'm not much for the 35mm perspective anyways.. I think I'd be better off swapping it for a 85/2.

On a side note, i already have a buyer on the 24, and found a guy selling a 21!

 

[Ade-oh]

Really excellent image!

The very very very first image I ever printed in the darkroom was from an Olympus OM negative, and I still have (and treasure) the print:

The enlarger came with a filed-out negative carrier, and I have occasionally used it - border and all - ever since, but I try not to over-do it (only works for some images). Anyway, my OM-1 + 50/1.4 accompanied me on our honeymoon, and captured many treasured memories.

 

[redisburning]

I ended up buying the 50mm f3.5 macro that was on KEH. This is going to replace my 50mm f1.4 as my daytime walk around lens I think.

Anyone got some samples they would like to share?

 

[philosomatographer]

I ended up buying the 50mm f3.5 macro that was on KEH. This is going to replace my 50mm f1.4 as my daytime walk around lens I think.

Anyone got some samples they would like to share?

Ken Norton over at Zone-10 used to extensive shoot a 50/3.5 macro, and some of his photo essays, like this one, are shot exclusively with it.

Interesting choice you made - a late-model Zuiko 50/1.4 (>1.1m serial number) is actually one of the better fast 50s ever made, tests have shown it to be superiour to the equivalent Leica Summilux (all pre-ASPH models). f/3.5 can be limiting (I know, it's the only lens I have for my Leica M3!). I could live with f/3.5 on a rangefinder, but it willl be tougher on an SLR I imagine.

Hope you really enjoy it when it arrives!

 

[redisburning]

Ken Norton over at Zone-10 used to extensive shoot a 50/3.5 macro, and some of his photo essays, like this one, are shot exclusively with it.

Interesting choice you made - a late-model Zuiko 50/1.4 (>1.1m serial number) is actually one of the better fast 50s ever made, tests have shown it to be superiour to the equivalent Leica Summilux (all pre-ASPH models). f/3.5 can be limiting (I know, it's the only lens I have for my Leica M3!). I could live with f/3.5 on a rangefinder, but it willl be tougher on an SLR I imagine.

Hope you really enjoy it when it arrives!

My 50mm f1.4 is the silvernose variant.

In the past I owned the last model they made as well but ultimately found it to be worse than the earlier lens in regards to wide open resolution and chromatic aberration control on my 40d.

It was truly inexplicable and to this day I still have no idea whether or not it was my copy being especially good (which I dont really think to be the case) or that particular late lens being bad (more likely, in my opinion) or some combination of the two (most likely).

Right now the only film I have is Neopan 400 anyway. If, in the future, I do shoot more color (which I likely will, just not soonish) it will be portra 160 or 400, neither of which I have speed problems with here in Texas.

Actually now that I found my charger I will go out and take some pictures around my little beach with the 50/1.4 so I can 100% crop peak. It does the job, I just wanted something really spectacular accross the frame because I feel like with what Im going to do to the poor negatives I might as well start from as good a base as I can.

 

[Prest_400]

It's been a loong time since I last shot with my OM-1.

I'm gaining some forces (and money) for buying some more film (Elitechrome) and shoot again. The itch and enthusiasm had faded away but it's returning 😉. I hope still dominate decently the art of exposure.

Pressumably I might be going to a trip in June and my Grandma will be 90 by then. I suppose it's time to get ready.


As of Zuikoholism, I'm cured... I still like to observe the lines of my OM-1, but don't crave new lenses anymore. I'm quite happy with that

No complaints whatsoever with the 50mm 1.8 (MiJ). It does all I need and my needs aren't very demanding. It would be nice if it were an f1.4 or higher... but that's something else and well, the bokeh is a bit unpredictable and can be harsh at times.

 

[wblynch]

Beauty! The Olympus long lost cousin. Rare as hen's teeth nowadays.

Congratulations.

Bit of a weirdo really...

 

[Ade-oh]

Definitely NSFW but it turns out that Richard Kern is a Zuikoholic too.

See http://www.vice.com/shot-by-kern/in-canada-1

With the second girl he shoots, he appears to be using an OM-1 (or possibly 2).