Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,206   Posts: 1,531,869   Online: 1022
      
Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 44
  1. #31

    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    12
    I reckon it does, although I don't have a good f3 at a reasonable price near me at the moment. Not to say that the price of the leica is reasonable haha

  2. #32
    L Gebhardt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    NH - Live Free or Die
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    1,675
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    18
    I second the idea of getting an XA. I carry that when I want something small that still shoots film. Excellent quality lens, good meter and easy rangefinder focusing. I have both an OM1 and an F100 (plus way too many other cameras), but all the SLRs have the same issue of not being pocketable. The weight isn't the issue if you only take one or two lenses, but the bulk is. And non of the systems are really that different as far as bulk goes. You still need a dedicated camera bag, they still hang the same way over your neck or shoulder with a lens that sticks out. Something like the XA is pocketable and doesn't get in the way at all. When I carry the XA I have more issues with a couple of extra rolls of film than the camera.

  3. #33
    skahde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    425
    Images
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by bed_hugs View Post
    Also ended up also holding the leica M6 that I eye every time I walk into the store.
    Poor boy, you're doomed...

  4. #34

    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    12
    Quote Originally Posted by skahde View Post
    Poor boy, you're doomed...
    I was doomed the moment I picked up a camera

  5. #35

    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    12
    Well I've since decided on getting an OM, but there was something I noticed when inspecting the cameras that bothered me a bit.

    I felt like the film advance lever on the OM4T was rougher than the OM2n. Is this common? I've never had an olympus slr before so I wouldn't know the characteristics of the bodies

  6. #36

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Mission Viejo, California
    Shooter
    127 Format
    Posts
    1,442
    It is true. The OM-2sp, OM-4/t and OM-3/t have rougher feeling film advance. I believe this is due to stronger internal gearing intended to stand up to high-speed motor drives.
    - Bill Lynch

  7. #37

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Aurora, IL
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,951
    Quote Originally Posted by wblynch View Post
    It is true. The OM-2sp, OM-4/t and OM-3/t have rougher feeling film advance. I believe this is due to stronger internal gearing intended to stand up to high-speed motor drives.
    The Nikon F3 has a very smooth film advance almost like the Leica and yet many was used with the MD-4 which is a 5fps motor drive without any problem. While Olympus did make 5fps drive for the OM series few of these cameras were used with motor drive.

  8. #38

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Aurora, IL
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,951
    Quote Originally Posted by L Gebhardt View Post
    I second the idea of getting an XA. I carry that when I want something small that still shoots film. Excellent quality lens, good meter and easy rangefinder focusing. I have both an OM1 and an F100 (plus way too many other cameras), but all the SLRs have the same issue of not being pocketable. The weight isn't the issue if you only take one or two lenses, but the bulk is. And non of the systems are really that different as far as bulk goes. You still need a dedicated camera bag, they still hang the same way over your neck or shoulder with a lens that sticks out. Something like the XA is pocketable and doesn't get in the way at all. When I carry the XA I have more issues with a couple of extra rolls of film than the camera.

    Quoted Y. Maitani
    "The OM was conceived as an SLR that could be used to photograph anything from outer space to bacteria, but there are situations in which you can't use an OM. For example, you can't go to a wedding as the guest of honor and carry an OM over the shoulder of your tuxedo.

    If you don't have a camera, you can't take photographs. I had realized that even if a camera could shoot everything from outer space to bacteria, users couldn't take any pictures if they didn't have the camera with them. In fact this was something that had been bothering me for many years. "

    And so he made the XA.

  9. #39

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    820
    I was in a similar position about 4 years ago except I had the EOS3. As you have seen, the difference in size and weight can be substantial but of course so are the features.



    BTW, there are quite a few differences in the choices presented to you and I agree with the recommendation that you keep what you have while you explore the differences until you find the right fit!

    I know I did . . . mostly . . .


    Larger version -> Cameras by Name

  10. #40

    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    12
    Quote Originally Posted by Les Sarile View Post
    I know I did . . . mostly . . .


    Larger version -> Cameras by Name
    wow what a collection ahah. It's nice to see side by side size differences between the cameras

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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