Retro-Grouch
Veteran
And the DSLR market is essentially dead except for Pentax.
vvilliam
Member
What's old is new, right? Let's give it a year or two.
BillBingham2
Registered User
I thought there was already an OM-3 and OM-4. That was just a dream, no?
B2 (;->
B2 (;->
Freakscene
Obscure member
Feverish nightmare.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
Frightening, but I owned both of them at one time or another in the past. Gads, that seems a long, long time ago!
I seem to recall that the OM-3 had a mechanically controlled shutter and the OM-4 was all electronic. I think, but cannot remember for sure, that both of them were titanium bodies and rather pricey in their day too.
Olympus has always made great lenses!
G
Freakscene
Obscure member
I have an OM-3ti, 40/2 and 50/2 macro here somewhere. It’s a beautiful, if idiosyncratic, machine. Those 2 series focus screens are amazing. But the shutterspeed ring used to periodically disconnect from the intermediate gear and leave me stuck wherever it had been set.
trix4ever
Well-known
Ever since it came out that Sally Mann used the 40/2 the price has gone mad, well over AU$1000 on fleabay, from memory it was nothing special.
Freakscene
Obscure member
I got mine new-old-stock when I worked in the lab of a camera store for $125 with staff discount. No-one wanted it. On film that is not super fine grained, at about f4 it is lovely. I shot a lot of APX100 at the time. The main thing was that there were not many lenses of that focal length for interchangeable lens cameras then. I didn’t want the expense of a CL, so the Olympus it was. At the time I had not heard that Sally Mann liked it and the focal length - I’m pretty sure it was before Mike Johnston had written about it.
Last edited:
Archiver
Veteran
Some years ago, I was talking to a flickr guy named Snausages2000 who wanted a Leica, but he bought an OM4 Ti with some lenses, and suddenly his lust for Leica disappeared. Mind you, he did get a M6 TTL and Summilux 50 later on, hahaha.
Four pages! Looks like this release has created a firestorm of discussion!
JohnGellings
Well-known
Ok.
I already use something else... from 24mp to 50mp. I have no issue with 20mp. I think the camera is over-priced. However, I concede that the sensor and the used prices of the Pen-F probably came into play for the price.
Like I said, I like small prints for the most part (while having the ability to print big if needed). What I had issue with is you assuming nobody else needs more than that because you used 5mp files to make big prints in the past. If Chris feels 20mp isn't enough, then I take his word for it.
skopar steve
Well-known
That 50mm f2.0 macro is a spectacular lens.
agentlossing
Well-known
Micro Four Thirds doesn't have enough space between the sensor and rear element for a mirror box of any size. Four Thirds would, if it wasn't defunct. As a Pentax user, though, I'm uninterested in SLR viewfinders for small formats unless they can work the kind of magic that the K-3 Mark III does with its APS-C viewfinder. I don't like small and dim finders.
raid
Dad Photographer
The digital OM3 is not worth $2000.
In comparison, I bought a new EPL1 for $99.
In comparison, I bought a new EPL1 for $99.
Leon C
Well-known
I always regret selling what I had in the 90's but still have the broken OM1n from then, probably for sentimental reasons as I love that camera and it has taken some lovely family memories but as I picked up a cheap OM1n and OM2n late last year, I'm now on the hunt for some more lenses, the lovely 28/3.5 is next on the list.
Freakscene
Obscure member
Indeed. As a normal lens I found it better than the 50mm Summicron v5 in essentially every way I could think to try it. But not the 50/1.4 ASPH, which it beats only in some kinds of flare resistance.
Last edited:
raid
Dad Photographer
Did OM make a slower 50mm macro lens?
Leon C
Well-known
They did a 50/3.5 which is liked by some, which will do 1:2 out of the box and can be had for not a lot of money, I've just put an offer in for one.
raid
Dad Photographer
I think that I have an OM 50mm 3.5 macro in Canon FD mount.
Leon C
Well-known
Very possibly as there was also a Nikon conversion mount as well IIRC for some Zuiko's.
Archiver
Veteran
Micro Four Thirds was designed specifically to remove the need for a mirror box and pentaprism viewfinder. By eliminating the mirror box, they could create a much smaller, more shallow body. Early interviews with the Olympus CEO (?) talked about a small interchangeable lens camera that you could put in a jacket pocket and carry to dinner. This was at a time when DSLR's ruled, and I carried a 30D in my shoulder bag everywhere. Micro Four Thirds system cameras were the first mirrorless cameras on the market, if you don't count the Leica M8.
Benefits of Micro Four Thirds
The Micro Four Thirds system's greatest appeal is to achieve high image quality, compactness, and lightness for photographers who want to enjoy a camera anytime, anywhere. The open standard means you can use lenses and camera bodies from a range of manufacturers. And that gives you high...
www.four-thirds.org
Last edited: