OM, I've become a Zuikoholic!

Hmmm, don't blame me if this fails, but my immediate thought was that the battery was dead and so the shutter can't be fired. I've risked it now and then and offered scrap prices for "dud" cameras. (The alternative is to carry a set of batteries for the things and test them properly. And pay the full price!)

But, as I said, don't blame me...

Regards, David
 
The 'battery check' should tell you if the battery is dead or not. If the check indicates that the battery is dead and the shutter fires on the 'red 60' setting (i.e. the all mechanical 1/60sec shutter speed that doesn't need batteries) then I would be 100% confident the problem was dead batteries.
 
Batteries dying very quickly is the big issue with the early OM-4 because of some fault with the printed circuit. I would think it highly likely that what happened is that the batteries have drained in this instance but, as mentioned above, you can check whether the shutter is working by putting the shutter speed ring in the M60 or B position and trying it. In the longer term, the solution is to either take the batteries out when you aren't using the camera or leave the shutter speed ring in the B position.
 
Thing is You cannot move the shutter ring to B or 60 and batteries are new. You cant press shutter on camera but when you press one on winderit sounds Ok but curtain does not move . Anyway seller will take it to repair man . I did not bought it.
 
adresaba said:
Thing is You cannot move the shutter ring to B or 60 and batteries are new. You cant press shutter on camera but when you press one on winderit sounds Ok but curtain does not move . Anyway seller will take it to repair man . I did not bought it.
Click to expand...
I think you have to press a small button to move it to the red speeds. Also, I once put in a 'new' battery, that had been on the shelf for too long, and the shutter got stuck.
These cameras need good batteries!






.... or get a OM1 instead :rolleyes:
 
Uh i didnt know that I am used to om2 and om1 :) I will wait for the guy that selling it to hand it over to repairman and then maybe I will buy it if everything will be ok. After I research a little about om4, and you helped me with your suggestions and explanations, now I think I will get one anyhow :)
p.s. excuse me for my bad grammar and everything else my English became little rusty :)
 
IMG_7723.JPG


The OM-1 with the black sheep of the Zuiko family - the 35 f/2.
 
I'm sure this has been mentioned in all these posts but I'll put it up again -- The Nikon eyepiece diopters work with the OM1 and OM2 series of cameras - not sure about the 3 and 4. They are called DK 20 now (used to be called for FG/EM) and I believe you have to adjust your correction by a diopter (but it's on the Nikon website). Also you can use the DK22 adapter and then the round diopter for the F3. Big help for eyeglass wearers - you can see the whole frame. You do have to slide them up a little when you open the camera back as the interfere.
 
p.giannakis said:
I only have this f/2 lens and i also find it to be very good but if you search on the internet you will see that the 35f/2 has somehow a bad reputation.
Click to expand...

I've seen the same comments, but I also notice that quite a few of them are being originated by people using them as adapted lenses on digital. I find mine to be great, on film!
 
plummerl said:
I've seen the same comments, but I also notice that quite a few of them are being originated by people using them as adapted lenses on digital. I find mine to be great, on film!
Click to expand...

I agree, this is a much better lens on film (especially high contrast b&w) than on digital. But even on digital, this lens is as sharp as Canon's EF 50 f/1.8.

This is a quick test i did when i bought it.

The picture:

Zuiko%2B8.JPG




The results:
centre.jpg


But as you said - this lens is far better on film than on digital.
 
p.giannakis said:
I agree, this is a much better lens on film (especially high contrast b&w) than on digital. But even on digital, this lens is as sharp as Canon's EF 50 f/1.8.

But as you said - this lens is far better on film than on digital.
Click to expand...

I have a zuiko 35mm f2. I have taken plenty of sharp pics with it, as well as plenty of none too sharp pics with it. I believe this inconsistency is due to focusing errors. For some reason, the 35 f2 doesn't snap into focus as well as most of its Zuiko brethren. This is particularly true with the 2-4 and 2-13 focusing screens.

The truth is that a lens' real world picture taking ability turns on more than its optical testing results. How easy is it to focus? How easy is it to hold steady? These qualities are more important as a practical matter than how a lens tests (because the theoretically sharpest lens in the world won't yield sharp photos if misfocused or shaken) but are hard to accurately generalize about based on weight or aperture, etc. For example, I have trouble holding a Vivitar Series 1 70-210 version 1 steady on my OM bodies, but am much steadier with a Series 1 70-210 version 3 (which is lghter) and with a Tamron SP 80-200 f2.8 (which is heavier). Likewise, I somehow find the Zuiko 35 f2 the least snappy focusing of all of the Zuiko f2.0 series of lenses I own -- including the 21, 24, 28, 35, 40, 50 macro, 90 macro and 100. Not that the 35 is hard to focus outdoors, but it doesn't snap into focus that well for me indoors or in dimmer lighting.
 
A question about OM-2n metering, please. My understanding that when set to Auto, the CdS meter in the viewfinder simply gives an estimate of what the actual silicon meter in the body is likely to choose. When a picture is taken, the mirror lifts and the silicon cells read reflected light off the pattern on the first curtain, and if >1/30 that will be the used shutter speed, but if ≤1/30 it will then determine the exposure with OTF metering. However, when set to manual, it is the CdS system in the viewfinder that is going to determine the shutter speed the user sets, and the silicon diode system in the body doesn't come into play.
So here's the question - if one installs a brighter screen, say a 2-series stolen from a later model wouldn't that make the manual metering less accurate; if the viewfinder is a stop brighter then the photo will be underexposed by a stop? I'm asking as my OM-2n has a the usual combination split-image centre surrounded by microprisms, which I think is a 1-13 type. I much prefer the microprisms and have found a 1-1 screen which I think will suit me better, and I suspect if they are made to be interchangeable then I'm sure Olympus made sure they have the same light transmission. But then I read here about the 2-series screen, and while I'm not tempted I wondered if it would interfere with accurate manual metering.

Chris
 
chrism said:
A question about OM-2n metering, please. My understanding that when set to Auto, the CdS meter in the viewfinder simply gives an estimate of what the actual silicon meter in the body is likely to choose. When a picture is taken, the mirror lifts and the silicon cells read reflected light off the pattern on the first curtain, and if >1/30 that will be the used shutter speed, but if ≤1/30 it will then determine the exposure with OTF metering. However, when set to manual, it is the CdS system in the viewfinder that is going to determine the shutter speed the user sets, and the silicon diode system in the body doesn't come into play.
So here's the question - if one installs a brighter screen, say a 2-series stolen from a later model wouldn't that make the manual metering less accurate; if the viewfinder is a stop brighter then the photo will be underexposed by a stop? I'm asking as my OM-2n has a the usual combination split-image centre surrounded by microprisms, which I think is a 1-13 type. I much prefer the microprisms and have found a 1-1 screen which I think will suit me better, and I suspect if they are made to be interchangeable then I'm sure Olympus made sure they have the same light transmission. But then I read here about the 2-series screen, and while I'm not tempted I wondered if it would interfere with accurate manual metering.

Chris
Click to expand...

Your assumption is correct. I would stick with the current screen.
 
chrism said:
A question about OM-2n metering, please. My understanding that when set to Auto, the CdS meter in the viewfinder simply gives an estimate of what the actual silicon meter in the body is likely to choose. When a picture is taken, the mirror lifts and the silicon cells read reflected light off the pattern on the first curtain, and if >1/30 that will be the used shutter speed, but if ≤1/30 it will then determine the exposure with OTF metering. However, when set to manual, it is the CdS system in the viewfinder that is going to determine the shutter speed the user sets, and the silicon diode system in the body doesn't come into play.
So here's the question - if one installs a brighter screen, say a 2-series stolen from a later model wouldn't that make the manual metering less accurate; if the viewfinder is a stop brighter then the photo will be underexposed by a stop? I'm asking as my OM-2n has a the usual combination split-image centre surrounded by microprisms, which I think is a 1-13 type. I much prefer the microprisms and have found a 1-1 screen which I think will suit me better, and I suspect if they are made to be interchangeable then I'm sure Olympus made sure they have the same light transmission. But then I read here about the 2-series screen, and while I'm not tempted I wondered if it would interfere with accurate manual metering.

Chris
Click to expand...
Yeap.
You can use the 1-1 screen on your OM-2N.
You can use any of the series 1 screens with the caveats mentioned in the manual regarding metering and lenses usable with some of them.

The reason the Series 2 screens were introduced was to restore the same brightness on the OM-2SP, OM-3 and -4 series to be equal to the OM-1 series and OM-2 and -2N.
These 3 later models all share the same body and a few things in common:
-1 SPD cell at the bottom of the mirror chamber
-a split beam mirror and
-a secondary mirror to re-direct part of the light coming in from the lens to the SPD cell.
As a result they don't have any metering cells behind the pentaprism and so they can have any screen without affecting the meter readings.
Because they have a split-beam mirror that is less reflective, the viewfinder is less bright than the OM-1 or the earlier OM-2. And so enters the Series 2 screens sole raison d'etre.
 
Thanks, guys, that makes sense. I had read of people cutting the tabs off 2-series lenses so as to be able to use them and enjoy the brightness (at least, until they looked at their negatives).

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