Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,933   Posts: 1,557,016   Online: 1170
      
Page 5 of 10 FirstFirst 12345678910 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 96
  1. #41
    Ken N's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Creston and Newton, Iowa.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    389
    Images
    8
    Parkpy, if you tried a 100/2 or 90/2 or a 35-80/2.8 you'd be highly tempted to just sell all the Nikon stuff. It's not that the other lenses are bad, but these are in a whole nuther league.
    http://www.zone-10.com

    When you turn your camera on, does it return the favor?

  2. #42

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Washington, the state
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,143
    Images
    16
    Quote Originally Posted by parkpy View Post
    I did not have too much time with my OM 24mm f/2.8, or 50mm f/1.4, but I loved the results of my OM 50mm f/1.8 and pricey 85mm f/2.0.
    The OP is looking to get a 50mm lens for right now. The OM-System has a lot to choose from in the standard focal lengths, depending what you are looking for. My latest 50 is the 50mm f2.0 Auto Macro. It is quickly becoming my go-to lens.
    Dave

    "She's always out making pictures, She's always out making scenes.
    She's always out the window, When it comes to making Dreams.

    It's all mixed up, It's all mixed up, It's all mixed up."

    From It's All Mixed Up by The Cars

  3. #43

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Washington, the state
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,143
    Images
    16
    Quote Originally Posted by kivis View Post
    Considering 2 of the high points in aperture preferred cameras. Both classics. Which would you choose and why?
    I bought my first OM-4T in November of 1987. I still have the camera. I bought the OM-4T as an upgrade to an Olympus OM-2S Program. The only other camera I was considering at the time was the Nikon F3HP. At he time I was using the OM-2S as Aperture Preferred Auto 75% of the time and Manual Mode 25% of the time. I remember my thought processes were as follows: 1) features of the camera body and building a selection of lenses to suit my needs. Some of the features that I liked for the Olympus were: 1) available Aperture Preferred Auto mode or Manual Mode each with an electronically controlled shutter, 2)Flash synch up to 1/2000th sec., 3)Spot metering with Multi-Spot averaging. I also owned several OM Zuiko lenses which I liked.

    For me, the feel of the Olympus OM cameras in my hand was also important. I like the size and the way the an OM camera is used is very easy. You hold the camera in your left hand. The three most important controls (shutter speed, aperture and focus) fall right to the fingertips of your left hand. You can get a feel for the shutter speed that is set by feel and you don't even need to keep track of it in the viewfinder. I can Pre-set an Aperture depending on the film selected, brightness of the scene, depth of field desired or other considerations. Any of the other controls are very unobtrusive and you can ignore or use them any way that you wish.
    Dave

    "She's always out making pictures, She's always out making scenes.
    She's always out the window, When it comes to making Dreams.

    It's all mixed up, It's all mixed up, It's all mixed up."

    From It's All Mixed Up by The Cars

  4. #44

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    281
    I've used both systems in my past professional career, finally favouring the Nikon system for the following reasons:

    The MD12 motordrive quicker and more straightforward to connect than the Olympus equivalent.
    The flimsy cover over the drive connection point of the OM's is easily dislodged and lost.
    The FE2's flash sync of 1/250th for all flashes is far superior for fill-in flash than the 1/60th on OM's.
    Nikon (in UK) still offer repair service for FE/FM series. Olympus only interested in digital users.
    OM4's heavy on battery power. FE's & FE2's battery use much more frugal.

    In general terms I found Nikon SLR's stood up to the demands of professonal use with more reliability than the OM's, which needed rather too many trips back to the repair shop, although I realise the OP will not necessarily be putting it to this kind of use.

  5. #45

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Johannesburg, South Africa
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    229
    There are a couple of areas where an Olympus OM4-Ti (or OM-3Ti) are simply unbeaten - in absolute terms - compared to other 35mm SLRs:

    • Viewfinder size and brightness, especially with the 2-series Lumi-Micron Matte focusing screens. It's unbelievable, the view is literally as bright and crisp as seen by the naked eye, and better even than the best glass rangefinder viewfinders (e.g. Leica M3)
    • Ergonomics: Ability to operate by feel, because of co-axial shutter speed, focus and aperture controls all focused around the lens axis, operated by the left hand. No other SLR can be operated "by feel" like an OM, period.
    • Physical size and weight: These bodies are TINY, but very robust (see OM-4Ti crash test). Not Nikon F robust, but among the most robust electronic film SLRs you'll encounter.


    The interesting thing is, these attributes don't necessarily make them "better" unless you really value them. For example, I spend as much time with my plain-prism Nikon F these days than what I do with my OM-3Ti. There is absolutely no question about it that the Nikon F, or the early (metal scalloped focus ring) Nikkor lenses are built to a much higher standard than the Olympus gear. Old Nikkors are built to the highest mechanical standards ever achieved by anybody (including Leica) as far as I am concerned.

    Want a simple test? Squeeze your Olympus Zuiko lens really hard between your fingers while focusing - you'll feel increased resistance or possibly be unable to focus at all. Squeeze a 1960s Nikkor 50mm f/2.0 for all it's worth (this was one of their cheapest lenses) and the focus is still smoother and better dampened than even new Zeiss ZF lenses, which feel like giant off-brand 1970s cheapies by comparison.

    Is this important? Probably not - the Zuikos are lighter, and very often optically better, than their Nikkor counterparts. The marvelous Zuiko 21mm f/2.0 is as small as a Nikon 50mm f/2.0! However, my 50-year-old, never-serviced Nikon F leaves me with no doubt that it'll be working in another 50 years' time (when it's a 100 years old). Not so for the Olympus / Zuiko equipment I have, which are all in various states of operational smoothness, etc. But the Nikon equipment weighs a ton, and is much more primitive. I am certainly extremely happy in using both the ultimate finesse that the SLR world has ever achieved (OM-3Ti, OM-4Ti, Zuikos) and the ultimate unbreakable, simple SLR (Nikon F). I am hard pressed to pick just one.

    I am comparing to Nikon's ultimate SLR here - the F - and not a more budget-oriented SLR like the FE series (because I use an F, and have only held an FE2 once). I like not being distracted by silly light meters these days, which is why the F appealed to me. Compared to an FE(2), I would probably choose the OM-4Ti every day. The lenses focusing the "wrong" way will get to you though!

    (Nikon's way is "wrong", of course, and not Olympus' - older or not!)

  6. #46

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    281
    Largely agree with the above. I'm sure the majority of photographers, who do not need the ultimate "toughness" of the Nikon brand will be perfectly happy with the OM series. When the Nikon F was first produced, it was aimed at pros. Nikon did their homework and they realised that what professionals (particularly those involved with news photography) demanded from their cameras was the ultimate in reliability, which meant the ability of the camera to withstand every kind of abuse and yet carry on working in all weather conditions. Consequently elements of the "tank like" build quality have filtered down to their later FM2's & FE2's as well.

    Today the demands (even from pros) are different. In a media world that is now celebrity driven rather than news driven, they want maximum megapixels. Toughness of build is no longer the primary requirement.

    Back in the 70's & 80's when I was active as a pro., the OM series were popular for a while and were regarded as being nice cameras for feature work, (for instance they were popular with fashion photographers) but lacking the ultimate strength to take the battering from day to day news photography in all kinds of weather. Nikon and Canon with its F1 were favoured here. Yes they tended to be on the heavy side and not particularly compact, the penalty paid for that extra sturdiness.

  7. #47
    Trasselblad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Sweden
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    43
    Even better if you find a good OM-2sp
    Sorry, but the OM-1, OM-2 and especially the OM-2sp are not in the same league as the OM-3 and 4. The lower numbered were consumer models, whereas the 3 and 4 were for the professional market, thus manufactured to completely different standards. When it comes to the OM-2sp in particular, it was one of the most unreliable of the lot. Ask John Hermanson of zuiko.com (he is simply THE best OM repairman there is) if in doubt.

    The OM-4T(i) does not have the earlier plain 4 battery problems. In addition, they added much improved seals for weather proofing, plus fast flash synch but only when using the F280 flash unit and then only at very short distances...to be honest, not very useful practically speaking.

    The well known (and excellent) spot metering apart, even in non-spot mode, the OM-4 center weighted metering is a stellar performer. Nikon did not match it until the advent of 3D matrix metering - and some even argue it still couldn't match the OM metering system. Personally, because the standard metering is already very good, I find that I don't use the spot metering very often at all. But sure, when you have wildly varying contrasts in a scene, the spot metering is God sent.

    The biggest downside of the OM system, of late, is that due to the 4/3 crowd and adapters, prime Zuiko glass has risen in price considerably. Luckily, I bought my kit(s) long time ago..

  8. #48
    Trasselblad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Sweden
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    43
    for all models of the OM2SP, OM4 and OM4T/i when not being used turn the shutter speed dial to B this disconnects the battery circuit and prevents battery drain
    From what I have heard, this method doesn't work. Perhaps John Hermanson can tell if it holds true or not?

    At any rate, battery problem on the 4T(i) is a non-issue, because they all have a different circuit to the plain 4 of old. My OM-3 does use its batteries a bit quicker than my 4Ti, but not to the extent that it bothers me. Plus on the 3, the batteries only drive the metering anyhow. And who needs metering at all times anyhow?

  9. #49
    RH Designs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Yorkshire Dales, England
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    657
    Images
    18
    The OM-1, 2 and 2SP are built at least as well as the 3 and 4. It's the double-digit OMs such as the OM-10 and OM-40 which are the consumer-grade bodies. That said my OM-2SP is the only one which ever gave me any trouble, the ISO dial is intermittent.

    Switching to "B" does not disconnect the batteries - I've tested that on an OM-4 and OM-2SP, the current draw on "B" is the same as other speeds. I have an early OM-4 and don't find the battery consumption a problem. It's a small price to pay for having the camera instantly ready to take a shot at any time without having to bother about switching it on.
    Regards,
    Richard.

    RH Designs - My Photography

  10. #50
    Ken N's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Creston and Newton, Iowa.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    389
    Images
    8
    I find the battery drain issue a bit interesting. Battery life in the cameras largely remain the same regardless of how much you use the camera. Might as well shoot.

    The ruggedness of the OMs have been just fine for me. They aren't wimpy. At this point, since most of use d.....l for most of our shooting, the wear and tear on the film bodies is nil.
    http://www.zone-10.com

    When you turn your camera on, does it return the favor?



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin