Vintage Classic Cameras:The Unvarnished Truth Olympus OM SLRS, Part 1: The M-1, OM-1,

Vintage Classic Cameras, The Unvarnished Truth
Olympus OM SLRS, Part 1: The M-1, OM-1, OM-1MD, and OM-1n

By Jason Schneider

Back in 1967 Olympus decided to create a full frame (24 x 36mm format) 35mm SLR to complement its very successful Pen F system of half-frame (18 x 24mm format) SLRs that had debuted in 1963. Many within the company suggested that the easiest and least costly path was offering a rebranded product made by another manufacturer. However, the renowned chief camera designer of Olympus, Maitani Yoshihisa (last name first per Japanese custom), fought hard to convince them that the best strategy was to design and build a truly unique product in house. Finally, after a yearlong struggle, he carried the day. His concept: a revolutionary ultra-compact SLR that was as durable and capable as the bulky, hefty pro SLRs of the day, such as the Nikon FTn Photomic. Over the next 4 years he relentlessly pressed his staff to create a pro-spec camera that was 20% smaller and 50% lighter than the Nikon and incorporated a shutter capable of 100,000 actuations. The result, unveiled at Photokina 1972, was initially named the Olympus M-1 in honor of Maitani, but after a very small production run, it was renamed the OM-1 to assuage complaints by E. Leitz Wetzlar, maker of the famed M-series Leicas.

rs=w:1440,h:1440

Original Olympus M-1 unveiled in 1972 soon became the OM-1.

rs=w:1440,h:1440

Olympus M-1 in chrome with 50mm f/1.4 G. Zuiko lens.

On first impression the Olympus OM-1 seems to be an elegantly scaled down version of a traditional SLR, and it certainly incorporates some time-proven elements. These include a horizontal travel focal plane shutter with rubberized cloth curtains, a manual, center-the-needle metering system employing 2 CdS cells, one on either side of the eyepiece, that read directly off the focusing screen at maximum aperture, and a mechanical meter cross-coupling system that uses an intricate series of coupling cords.

However, when you look closer, it’s clear that the OM-1 is a lot more than a downsized conventional 35mm SLR. The knob on top where the shutter-speed dial is usually found is the film speed dial, and it has a lock to prevent accidental mis-setting. The actual 1-1/000 sec plus B shutter dial is concentric with the lens mount (like a Nikkormat) and it couples to the speed control cam stack (which controls the slit width, the pallet engagement and the retard engagement) that’s located beneath the mirror box to save space and lower the height of the pentaprism. The reflex mirror itself is oversized to prevent image cutoff with lenses up through the Olympus 800mm telephoto, and it incorporates an air-damping piston-type shock absorber to reduce noise and vibration, the first in a 35mm SLR. The shutter itself uses special thin high tensile strength fabric cords to connect the shutter curtains rather than ribbons to save space while enhancing durability. One could go on for many pages detailing all the ingenious space saving stratagems to be found in the OM-1, but you now have some idea why it took over 4 years to design the camera that ignited the ultracompact 35mm SLR revolution of the ‘70s.

Other notable OM-1 features: 11 interchangeable viewing screens removed through the open lens mount; standard screen is matte with split-image rangefinder and microprism collar; pentaprism viewfinder shows 97% of actual picture field plus meter needle; ratchet type wind lever operates in a single 150-degree stroke or several shorter strokes; double exposure prevention with override, self-zeroing additive exposure counter; rewind crank and hinged back; ASA settings 25-1600. The camera measures an incredibly compact 5-3/8 x 3-1/4 x 3-3/16 inches and weighs a mere 24.0 ounces with standard 50mm f/1.8 F. Zuiko lens. NOTE: All Olympus OM-1 models including the OM-1. OM-1 MD, and OM-1n are designed to use discontinued 1.35v (PX625 or equivalent) mercury batteries and must be modified by installing a diode to give accurate meter readings with currently available 1.5v alkaline or silver-oxide batteries of the same size. Any well-equipped camera repair outfit can do this job for about $50, and if you’re reasonably handy you can do it yourself for about half that amount.

rs=w:1440,h:1440

Rare black Olympus M-1 courtesy FilmPhotograph.com

rs=w:1440,h:1440

Rare gold finished Olympus OM-1 with custom covering, courtesy CameraQuest

Olympus M-1: According to Olympus 52,000 bodies bearing the M-1 logo on top were produced before the name was changed, making them relatively uncommon, but not super-rare. What is super rare is a factory black M-1—it’s said only 25 of them were made, and you may rest assured they fetch a pretty penny. Bottom line: If you’re a user collector who wants to tote something more distinctive and conversational than a run-of-the-mill OM-1, you can indulge yourself by acquiring an M-1 for $225-400 (chrome body with 50mm f/1.8 or f.1.4 Zuko lens) a premium of about $50-100 over the standard issue OM-1. No, it won’t accept a motor drive without modification, but then you wouldn’t want to modify an original classic M-1 anyway.

rs=w:1440,h:1440

Olympus OM-1 with 50mm f/1.8 F. Zuiko lens

Olympus OM-1: The oldest OM-1 bodies dating from 1973 would not accept the Olympus OM Motor Drive 1—the bottom cover had to be replaced, an MD switch added to allow the motor to be mounted, and the entire slow speed governor plus some brass speed-governing cams had to be replaced. With newer ‘old-style’ OM-1 bodies you only had to add the MD switch, a new bottom cover, and calibrate the switch. Bottom line: An original OM-1 is fine choice so long as motor drive compatibility is not important to you, but if you ever plan to add one of these beautifully designed ultra-compact accessories in the future, go for an OM-1MD or an OM-1n, either of which will accept the motor without modification. OM-1 cameras in clean functional condition with 50mm f/1.8 or 50mm f/1.4 Zuiko lenses are currently available in the $100-200 price range but you can occasionally snag one for less than 100 bucks. Black OM-1s are less common than chrome models but they’re currently priced similarly or perhaps slightly higher.

rs=w:1440,h:1440

Black Olympus OM-1 with 50mm f/1.4 G. Zuiko lens

rs=w:1440,h:1440

Olympus OM-1MD with 50mm f/1.8 F. Zuiko lens, MD logo on rewind side.

Olympus OM-1MD: In 1974 Olympus brought forth the OM-1MD, which, as its name implies, is an OM-1 that accepts an Olympus motor drive directly without requiring any modifications. This version usually has a small “MD” on the front and a small slot with a circular cover on the bottom that covers the motor drive coupling. The MD logo is located on the front of the body, either as a small plastic escutcheon near the bottom on the rewind side of the camera, or a sticker placed higher up on the other side, directly below the shutter release. Sometimes the MD logo is absent entirely, either because it fell off or was never applied at the factory. Bottom line: At prices generally ranging from $100-275 depending on lens and condition, the OM-1MD is a good choice for OM-1 lovers that require motor drive compatibility, but the OM-1n may be even better. But remember, when it comes to buying user-collectible classics, functionality and condition are everything—the specific model is less important so long as it has the features you need.

rs=w:1440,h:1440

Olympus OM-1MD body with MD sticker on front below shutter release.

rs=w:1440,h:1440

Olympus OM-1 in chrome with 50mm f/1.8 F. Zuiko lens.

rs=w:1440,h:1440

Black Olympus OM-1n body.

Olympus OM-1n: The final iteration of the OM-1, it’s quite similar to the OM-1MD but it adds a redesigned film advance lever, a flash ready/ exposure confirmation LED in the finder, and automatic X sync regardless of the position of the FP/X switch when it’s used in conjunction with a T-series Olympus flash unit mounted on a Flash Shoe 4. It’s easily identifiable by an OM-1n logo on the top plate. While the original OM-1 isn’t unreliable, some of the early models did experience problems when subjected to hard use by pros and Olympus steadily incorporated mechanical upgrades to enhance their reliability. Some of these are found in the OM-1MD, but all of them wound up in the OM-1n. Bottom line: The OM-1n is probably the best choice for OM-1 fans seeking a manual metering ultracompact analog SLR that’s a reliable everyday shooter. If you’re into spare no expense vintage glitz, there were various Olympus OM-1 and OM-1n cameras finished in gold and with exotic coverings including snakeskin and red leather. While the price of normal chrome or black OM-1n models have escalated in recent years to $100-250 depending on lens and cosmetics, they still represent good value fir the money. The fact that these classics are complemented by an extensive system of high-quality lenses and accessories that are readily available at affordable prices is a substantial part of their enduring appeal.
 
what a great article/thread, , back in 1980/81 I really wanted an om10 as my first 'serious' slr, they got me a Pentax instead, (which started a 40 year plus love affair with Pentax. I still, (GAS attack), every now and again Hanker after a black om10!
 
what a great article/thread, , back in 1980/81 I really wanted an om10 as my first 'serious' slr, they got me a Pentax instead, (which started a 40 year plus love affair with Pentax. I still, (GAS attack), every now and again Hanker after a black om10!

The OM-10 power switch's innards are fragile and tend to break, rendering the camera into a cute paperweight.
 
How does such small, light camera handle shutter vibration? Back fifteen or so years ago, I had one of these cameras (OM1n) come into the house, still sealed in plastic bag in box. Ha, ha, couldn't bring myself to break the seal. I ended up flipping for a small profit. Hmm, wonder if it ever got used.

The OM-1 and -2 are very well damped vibration-wise, as is the Pentax MX, a direct competitor.
 
Have used the OM-1 for 47 years, never accidentally unlocked the lens adjusting the shutter speed. I dunno, muscle memory? But then I also never had a Nikkormat or got into the Nikon system. My journey into the OM system was; 1st. SLR, Miranda D, 1970, 2nd SLR, Olympus Pen F, 1972, 3rd SLR, Fujica ST701 (nice little camera actually) circa 1973, then a OM-1 in late 74’.
Every one except the Fujica was used. Since that time I’ve had several SLR’s pass through my hands, but never used them that much. Mostly obtained because they could be had, working with a normal lens, for $20 or less. So….just curiosity I guess.
A person just has a list of preferences and tries to check as many boxes when they select a camera to use. For some that was Olympus, for others Pentax, or Nikon or Canon or Topcon or Konica or….wow, it used to be quite a long list. You name it, somebody is a fan.

Back in 1972 I was wanting to get out of an M42 system, and into something more useful, and the Nikkormat was my choice. My plan was to eventually go professional after I got out of the Navy, but I needed to make money first, so after a couple of go-nowhere jobs I started working for a railroad which seemed to be a good career move. It was quite a few years before I finally took the plunge and opened a studio, but holding down a regular job to finance the photography one forced me to make a decision after 8 months when the landlord offered to let me out of my lease, and I chose the railroad for the pension plan I had already invested in. I figured I'd have plenty of time and money to pursue a low key career as a photographer after I retired, but I was put on disability ten years before I could make retirement age, and that derailed everything for me.

But with a lot of idle time, and a decent budget to work from I managed to buy quite a few different makes of cameras and lenses, accumulating what one friend described as a small camera store worth of gear. I could always get some decent images with the various models, but trying to remember what little operational quirks they all had got to be a hassle, so I switched back to just using Nikon for 35mm. At least until I delved into Leica rangefinders and SLR's. So now I have all this extra gear I need to get rid of without someone down at the RRB thinking I've gone into business.

Anyway, it was fun to use all the other systems while it lasted, now it's time to pass them on to others who will get some joy out of them.

PF
 
I lusted after the OM system as a teenager but couldn't afford it. Today I have an OM-2n and an OM-1. My main gripe: I find the viewfinder too large and better adapted to accurate focusing than framing. I also wish there was a grip.
 
I chose a Nikkormat because of access to Nikkors through my Father. I tried the OM, bought one about 15 years ago, loved it.

Sadly I think that companies if they follow the pattern established over the past twenty years is that we will never see a company spend as much time or money on such a disruptive brave industry changing system as the OM was.

B2 (;->
 
I lusted after the OM system as a teenager but couldn't afford it. Today I have an OM-2n and an OM-1. My main gripe: I find the viewfinder too large and better adapted to accurate focusing than framing. I also wish there was a grip.

Exactly, that's why the contemporary Canon F-1 and Nikon F2 have much lower finder magnification, 0.77x in the case of the F-1.

Honestly, the huge finder was a gimmick...
 
Back
Top Bottom