tomalophicon
Well-known
OM101 is da bomb (not).
So, if I want to buy an OM1, as I originally thought about, which OM should I now consider, seeing as the original had a mercury battery which is no longer allowed. I guess what I'm asking is this: Which one of the OM series would you folks suggest? I've been a Pentax Spotmatic guy for decades, and I've been intrigued reading this forum and I'm wondering if switching to the OM's would be of value?
Thank you Chris, for the candid take on the two marques. I'm going to buy an OM just to compare the two in terms of using them both before I make an uninformed decision.
I want to buy a 35mm lens but my budget is limited..
I have now seen a 35 F2,8 Vivitar lens for 35 euro's
Is this a good price? how does this lens compare to the Zuiko 35F2.8 in sharpness en importantly size because a want to keep my set nice and compact..
Compactness is not something the designers had in mind when designing the 35-70 btw...
(insert photo here)
Not possible, unfortunately. The OM flange-to-film distance is greater than that of most 35mm SLR systems - no space for an adaptor, and you'd need pretty specialised surgery to make one of the Zeiss lenses fit.
This is not just brand loyalty talking, but there really isn't much reason to desire the modern Zeiss lenses on the OM system. The Zuiko 21mm f/2.0 and 24mm f/2.0 are honestly not outperformed in practical terms, considering that you are shooting 35mm film. Olympus' true speciality was making small, ultra-high performance wide angle lenses - the joy of the OM system just wouldn't be the same without it.
The Zeiss lenses are beastly giants (look at the Distagon 21mm f/2.8! A full stop slower, and more distortion to boot. Oh, and they generally feel like cheap 1970s third-party off-brand lenses in terms of build quality, compared to real Zuikos or Nikkors).
If you really want to shoot the Zeiss lenses on film, pick up a Nikon F with plain prism. Beautiful, any OM-1 lover cannot disagree with it, exceptionally well-built (will crush an OM, if it wanted to), and just that bit larger to fit well with the giant Zeiss lenses. Oh, and cheap!
Ask yourself - what compelling feature does any OM body have to even think of a cumbersome off-brand lens mounting solution? And you'd definitely not have auto-aperture, etc. I can't think of any...
So, if I want to buy an OM1, as I originally thought about, which OM should I now consider, seeing as the original had a mercury battery which is no longer allowed. I guess what I'm asking is this: Which one of the OM series would you folks suggest? I've been a Pentax Spotmatic guy for decades, and I've been intrigued reading this forum and I'm wondering if switching to the OM's would be of value?
i am seriously thinking of getting an om-1n after i sell a couple of things. i want a compact slr to match my r2m and x100.
.
well, there are non-mercury equivalents, aren't there? if i can get within a stop or less with an equivalent, i can set the asa to compensate.
is the om2 shutter battery dependent?
I bought a brace of OMs (an OM1n and an OM2n) thinking I'd sell the latter. I changed the light seals on the OM1n and went out out to shoot with Fuji 800Z. The results are so nice I've spent this evening replacing the seals on the OM2n. I may well take these on a trip to Alaska in the Spring rather than my M2s.
To be honest, I don't think you can go wrong with either the OM1n or the OM2n.
Pete