OM, I've become a Zuikoholic!

Range-rover said:
I use a Zinc Air hearing Aid battery it's about 4 volts and it's good.
you can alway have your's modded to take a newer silver oxide type
as well, enjoy your new camera.

Range
Click to expand...


Zinc Air replacement batteries are 1,4V, not 4V !!

Very good for replacing the mercury cells (1,35V) though holding the charge for much shorter time. Best IMO are 1,5V silver oxyde cells in an adapter to get the required 1,35V
 
The 2-13 and 2-4 focusing screens are clearly the best, being quite possibly the best focusing screens ever put into a camera. I have the 1-13 and 1-4n screens as well and they are very good. However, the 2-13 and 2-4 screens are MUCH better with any lens out there. The only real problem with those screens is that they are: (1) very expensive; (2) very rare; and (3) lucky owners (like me) generally feel the same way about them as the late Charleton Heston felt about his guns . . . . ("Out of my cold, dead hands . . . ." is the quote).
 
I disagree. For my money, the 1-4n screen is the best due to higher contrast. I had a hard (very hard) time focusing a modified 2-4 screen in an OM-2n when I had it (both the camera and the screen) and I seem to miss focus more often with the 2-13 screen in my 4T than the 1-4n screen in my OM-2. I also tend to work faster with the 1-4n screen as I'm not constantly trying to "match" vertical lines to confirm focus. With the 1-4n, once you nail focus the scene seems to jump out at you...Ken Norton of Zone 10 referred to it as a "sparkle" which is not a bad description. This is especially true when using lenses that are sharp wide open like a late SN 50/1.4.

dtcls100 said:
The 2-13 and 2-4 focusing screens are clearly the best, being quite possibly the best focusing screens ever put into a camera. I have the 1-13 and 1-4n screens as well and they are very good. However, the 2-13 and 2-4 screens are MUCH better with any lens out there. The only real problem with those screens is that they are: (1) very expensive; (2) very rare; and (3) lucky owners (like me) generally feel the same way about them as the late Charleton Heston felt about his guns . . . . ("Out of my cold, dead hands . . . ." is the quote).
Click to expand...
 
I love the 1-4 (actually I have the 1-10 but it's the same with grid lines). I can focus off center of the subject with no problem.

Peace
 
More photos please

More photos please

The Zuiko 50/1.2, a reliable bokeh machine:

at f2, if I remember right:

r2-Scan-140209-0004-X2.jpg


Wide open:

r2-Scan-140209-0008-X2.jpg


Roland.
 
nikku said:
I disagree. For my money, the 1-4n screen is the best due to higher contrast. I had a hard (very hard) time focusing a modified 2-4 screen in an OM-2n when I had it (both the camera and the screen) and I seem to miss focus more often with the 2-13 screen in my 4T than the 1-4n screen in my OM-2. I also tend to work faster with the 1-4n screen as I'm not constantly trying to "match" vertical lines to confirm focus. With the 1-4n, once you nail focus the scene seems to jump out at you...Ken Norton of Zone 10 referred to it as a "sparkle" which is not a bad description. This is especially true when using lenses that are sharp wide open like a late SN 50/1.4.
Click to expand...

Given the clarity of the 2-4 and 2-13 screens, one has to use a specific focusing technique. One should use a back and forth focusing action. If you just gradually turn the focusing ring in one direction to focus, one is tempted to stop focusing prematurely when the subject looks pretty sharp, when in fact the image will get sharper and sharper with a greater rotation. You want to overshoot the focus and turn back quickly in a back and forth focusing action. This will lead to precise focusing.
 
I just received my 1-13 screen only to find out that I already had a 1-13 in the camera. That was dumb and I should have looked but I thought the camera came stock with a different screen.
 
mllanos1111 said:
It seems the 50/1.8 gets no respect but it appears to be a nice little lens, especially for travel.
Click to expand...

Having used it on m4/3 digital with live-view focus magnification, I can attest that this lens is very, very good by f/2.8. It's only cheap cause they made millions of them, not due to the optics...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

K
A couple of questions on the Olympus OM-G/OM-20
Replies
5
Views
807
KoNickon
K
Shab
A 35mm lens for a Nikon FM3A
2 3
Replies
42
Views
3K
Dogman
Dogman
Disappointed_Horse
Nikon Close-Up Filters
Replies
12
Views
192
Disappointed_Horse
Disappointed_Horse
dexdog
Konica 50mm and Topcor 5cm LTM
2
Replies
27
Views
534
dexdog
dexdog
farlymac
Guide Number Nikkor
Replies
2
Views
202
farlymac
farlymac
Back
Top Bottom