OM, I've become a Zuikoholic!

There was a time i got so obsess with the zuiko lens...so much so i spend so much buying the various lenses...then i got hooked with Rangefinder and i had to sell them away...

guess what....i am still holding on to the OM1N and a 50mm f1.8 lenses...in my opinion, the 50mm f1.8 lens is awesome..something which i will not sell
 
This (from last week) is the first print I produced from a Zuiko 35mm f/2.0 image, having only used this lens for about two months. I fills the gap between 21mm and 50mm in my system, and I have taken to preferring it over my usual 50mm. I printed it to 12x16in to evaluate performance, and it's quite extraordinarily good, as good as any I have been able to achieve from 35mm film, really. Granted, it was stopped down, but the bad rap the 35/2.0 receives is completely unjustified in my opinion - it has wonderful character, and plenty of resolution. Flare-resistance is among the best of any lens ever made (in the 1980s, it was officially the most flare-resistant lens ever tested by PopPhoto). People really should stop obsessing about the performance of this lens, in my opinion...

Pop Soda Fire
pop_soda_fire_by_philosomatographer-d41gr8p.jpg

(Kodak TMY400-2 [35mm], OM-3Ti, Zuiko 35mm f/2.0, hand printed in the darkroom on 12x16in Ilford MG IV paper)

P.S. Note the complete lack of geometrical distortion, evident at the top of the image. This is nothing short of extraordinary for a fast 35mm SLR (retrofocus) lens. Maitani's team always went to such great lengths to correct this particular kind of distortion.
 
Some more contribution to this giant thread from my work, both scanned darkroom prints:

Inner Smile in the Rain
inner_smile_in_the_rain_by_philosomatographer-d3hkxu3.jpg

(Kodak TMY400-2, Zuiko 50mm f/1.4 (guess focused while briskly walking), OM-3Ti)

Trash Scourer
trash_scourer_by_philosomatographer-d3hkxrv.jpg

(Kodak TMY400-2, Zuiko 135mm f/3.5 (through car window), OM-3Ti)
 
Wow! That's a beautiful picture! I like it very much!

I'm becoming a Zuikoholic too... I started wit an OM-10 and 50/1.8, just to have something "old style" to shoot with, but I started to use it more and more... Until I bought a beautiful OM-1n, that's really a joy to shoot with... A few months ago I bought a Zuiko 200/5, and some days ago a 28/2.8 ...
Ok, I'm in the tunnel now, I suppose... ;-)
 
ops! You were posting while I was writing... Sorry.
In my previous post I liked the Pop Soda picture, and now I must appreciate the Trash Scourer...
 
ops! You were posting while I was writing... Sorry.
In my previous post I liked the Pop Soda picture, and now I must appreciate the Trash Scourer...

Thank you, spiderfrank! Most often my photographic vision is expressed with a large format camera these days, but for having that small, ever-capable photographic companion (if film is your thing) the OMs are indispensable... I keep on getting great images out of mine. I used an OM-1n for quite a while, and it's still the best-looking, best-built OM there is, for sure.
 
This (from last week) is the first print I produced from a Zuiko 35mm f/2.0 image, having only used this lens for about two months. I fills the gap between 21mm and 50mm in my system, and I have taken to preferring it over my usual 50mm. I printed it to 12x16in to evaluate performance, and it's quite extraordinarily good, as good as any I have been able to achieve from 35mm film, really. Granted, it was stopped down, but the bad rap the 35/2.0 receives is completely unjustified in my opinion - it has wonderful character, and plenty of resolution. Flare-resistance is among the best of any lens ever made (in the 1980s, it was officially the most flare-resistant lens ever tested by PopPhoto). People really should stop obsessing about the performance of this lens, in my opinion...

Pop Soda Fire
pop_soda_fire_by_philosomatographer-d41gr8p.jpg

(Kodak TMY400-2 [35mm], OM-3Ti, Zuiko 35mm f/2.0, hand printed in the darkroom on 12x16in Ilford MG IV paper)

P.S. Note the complete lack of geometrical distortion, evident at the top of the image. This is nothing short of extraordinary for a fast 35mm SLR (retrofocus) lens. Maitani's team always went to such great lengths to correct this particular kind of distortion.


Can I give you a cyber-Hi Five ?
1. That is an interesting and multifaceted photograph (read: the opposite of boring)

2. That is one good looking print. Darkroom print.

3. And your assessment of the 35/2 Zuiko is like music to my ears :)

4. OM-3Ti ? cool.
 
not so beautiful, just "my two cents"...

this is Venezia, of course
OM1_166.jpg

Om-1n, Zuiko 50/1.8, Ilford HP5+, developed in Utrafin Plus 1+4 for 7.5 min
 
Can I give you a cyber-Hi Five ?
1. That is an interesting and multifaceted photograph (read: the opposite of boring)

Thanks! *high five*

2. That is one good looking print. Darkroom print.

Well, I have been practicing for three years... I am getting to a point where I am pretty happy with my ability to realise my vision in the print.

3. And your assessment of the 35/2 Zuiko is like music to my ears :)

I am starting to really like the lens, yes. I guess it's too early to tell in terms of all-round performance - have not made prints shot wide open with it yet, etc - but it's a little gem so far.

4. OM-3Ti ? cool.

Oh yeah. Though mine is only semi-cool - the slow shutter speeds are out (have been ever since I bought it last year) - planning to send it to John Hermanson soon-ish.
 
Can you explain the 2 enlarger thing?
I just expose the rebate slightly, but it ain't grey, it's black.
Thanks,
Tom.

Exactly - with a single enlarger, your options are limited. First of all, it assumes you don't want to crop *at all* and you cannot get a precise border, you are limited by the shape of the camera's film gate, which usually has rounded corners.

With two enlargers, you have a second easel already set up, and you can put a piece of glass over the print, which has been made opaque (e.g. with tape, pinstripes, etc) except for the area you want to expose as the border. One also then has a lot of control, i.e. different exposure times cause different shades of grey.

It's by no means as easy as creating a border digitally, but once one is setup, the results are nice.
 
Exactly - with a single enlarger, your options are limited. First of all, it assumes you don't want to crop *at all* and you cannot get a precise border, you are limited by the shape of the camera's film gate, which usually has rounded corners.

You can crop and create black borders with a single enlarger. It's very easy (especially with a 4 blade easel) and there are various ways of doing it. Get something like a steel ruler with straight edges and expose thin strips of the paper, i.e. thin strips between the easel blade and ruler. You can even do variations on this theme; like borders of varying thickness, or raising the ruler so that the inner edge of the border is blurred. This is obviously all done after the paper has been exposed and the negative removed from the neg carrier.

With a bit of ingenuity you can even create a black rectangle *outside* the picture area.
 
Back
Top Bottom