OM, I've become a Zuikoholic!

I'm waiting for an OM2n to arrive in the mail. I tried an EOS5 with my Canon lenses I use for digital, and I just find it too automated and too plastic. However, I did
 
robbeiflex said:
I'm waiting for an OM2n to arrive in the mail. I tried an EOS5 with my Canon lenses I use for digital, and I just find it too automated and too plastic. However, I did
Click to expand...

...find that there is a place for a film slr in my kit. Time to see why so many here are into the OM's!

Cheers,
Rob

PS: oops, iPhone operator error!
 
I have 4 Nikons (F, F2, F3, F100) and about 20 Nikon lenses and wanted to stick to one SLR system (which I like very much)

But then.... Bought an OM-2N, OM-4 .... 6 Zuiko lenses... Few days ago the 35/2 arrived.... Today I ordered the 50/3.5 Macro....

What is happening to me? :eek:
 
JSU said:
I understand the differences between the OM1 and the OM2n, particularly the meter display and self timer.

But it strikes me that functionally when an OM3 has a battery to power its meter it is functionally identical to an OM4, save for the self timer.

As svelt as are the OM2 & OM1, the function of the OM4 wins out for me. The meter is still state of the art, something not available on any DSLR. It is one thing to chimp after the fact, quite another thing to sample with a spot meter a few diifferent zones and have a correct average based on what I desire and not an algorithm set at the factory.
Click to expand...

yes the om-3 is fully mechanical on all speeds, it lacks the self timer, purist style, it takes the modern batteries, works wonderfully with the series 2- screens, the viefinder although a little smaller than the OM-1/2 is crisper, and with series 2 screens it out of this world. it has the same metering system as the om-4, a pity there were so few made, for me the om-3 (or ti) is the best SRL ever made.

additionally to the om-1 features you get the 1/2000 shutter speed (important in my book, for the great f2 lenses) diopter adjustment is great (miss that sorely on my FM3A) unlike the om-4 it s not an AE body but purely manual but adds exactly the same superb metering system as the OM-4, also the shutteraction is the most pleasent from all OM cameras different than the OM-4, for me the OM3 is what the M6 is to the M system.
 
I've said this before but... I'm a confirmed OM fanatic and I really didn't get on with the OM3. Firstly, it shares the battery drain problem with the older OM4; in my OM3, the batteries were pretty much used up if I left it unused for two weeks. Secondly, whilst it also shares the excellent multi-spot metering system with the OM4, it obviously doesn't do the OM4's clever trick of averaging out the multi-spot readings automatically which, in practice, makes it slow and clunky to use. I had mine for around two years before selling it, but it never became a 'go to' camera for me, unlike my OM1s and OM4tis.
 
Ade-oh said:
I've said this before but... I'm a confirmed OM fanatic and I really didn't get on with the OM3. Firstly, it shares the battery drain problem with the older OM4; in my OM3, the batteries were pretty much used up if I left it unused for two weeks. Secondly, whilst it also shares the excellent multi-spot metering system with the OM4, it obviously doesn't do the OM4's clever trick of averaging out the multi-spot readings automatically which, in practice, makes it slow and clunky to use. I had mine for around two years before selling it, but it never became a 'go to' camera for me, unlike my OM1s and OM4tis.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but I disagree on both accounts.

I took the batteries out once I'm done using the OM-3. Problem solved.
Even a scatterbrain like me can do that without a problem. :)

And the multi-spot metering works perfectly for me. The camera tells me what it thinks is the best settings. I decide if I want to expose more or less than that (and the shutter speed ring around the lens mount works so well for this). To me it's natural and not clunky at all.
 
I really shouldn't ask, but how much better is the 21/2 up close compared to the 21/3.5 in your opinion? Does anyone have/had both, willing to comment? I'm thinking of maybe selling a kidney and upgrading to the f2 version :(
 
I don't know about the OM-3, but on an OM-4 you can turn the shutter ring to the mech. 1/60 or B and it disables the electronics, so you don't need to physically take out the batteries when you store it. I do this every time I put away my OM-4Ti, even though it doesn't have battery drain problems, just to be safe. I have had the camera for a few years now, batteries are still good.

As much as I love my mechanical cameras, electronic ones are excellent as well. I really appreciate the auto exposure modes on my electronic cameras, they are mostly infallible and let me concentrate on the shot instead of turning a shutterspeed dial.

And my contribution:

Olympus OM-4Ti, Zuiko 50mm f1.4, Kodak 400TX
6974356602_0ef6f784d8_c.jpg
 
Trius said:
Keith, I may withdraw my offer of buying you beers when you visit. :p
Click to expand...


But I'll bring my OM-3 and let you fondle it while we imbibe! Apart from which you are partly responsible for my bourgening OM habit you do realise Earl!

Actually I'm more than happy to get this OM-3 for the $470.00 shipped and paypal'd ... I almost considered paying this much for one I spotted a few months ago and was a definite user!

Nothing will knock my OM-1 off it's perch as my favourite OM though! :)
 
As an aside I noticed in another thread that Roger has come up with a clever new name for the SLR forum! :rolleyes:

We've had 'Evil' and currently are the 'Un RF' which I quite like actually!

"huge heavy tub of SLR lard"
Click to expand...

No doubt about it ... the man's a genius! :D
 
Jockos said:
I really shouldn't ask, but how much better is the 21/2 up close compared to the 21/3.5 in your opinion? Does anyone have/had both, willing to comment? I'm thinking of maybe selling a kidney and upgrading to the f2 version :(
Click to expand...

start thinking about that kidney... had both, kept the f2, it's stellar and worth the money imo, i sometimes miss the supercompactness of the 3.5 (although at F3.5 i feel both were equal..), but overall the f2 is much more versatile, it gets 2 stops more light, one of the few lenses i own which is truly sharp from wideopen, so f2 is more than just an emergency setting, also the f2 version gives you great flexibiliy should you want to adapt it to nex, canon FF or whaterver suitable digital platform. for the size though the 3.5 version is unbeatable.
 
With Adox CHS Art 25 film and the Zuiko Macro lenses, I am producing images that are the equals of my medium- and large-format imagery in every respect (I mean this very literally, I shoot a lot of larger-format film).

Rays and Stamens
rays_and_stamens_by_philosomatographer-d4yxbfb.jpg

(Zuiko 135mm Macro @ f/4.5, Adox CHS Art 25 developed in D-76 1+1, OM-4Ti)

Blobules
blobules_by_philosomatographer-d4yxbde.jpg

(Zuiko 50mm @ f/1.2, very strong crop, Adox CHS Art 25, OM-4Ti)

The second image (above), of course, isn't anywhere near the quality of the first, but it is a very strong (about 15% of frame area) crop of a hand-held, close-focused image with a lens not optimised for this sort of thing. The 50/1.2 does present delicious character with this peerless film, here are another two "snapshots":

watering_the_garden_by_philosomatographer-d4yxb0u.jpg


porch_lookout_by_philosomatographer-d4yxb33.jpg

​
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom