| | | -
I've owned 2 OM-10's--bought one for my(ex)wife and one to fill in for my OM-1 they are trash and not worth owning. Neither of mine lived longer than a year. By comparison, my Om-1 was purchased new in 1982, OM-4 in 1985, OM-10's in 1983, replaced by OM-4 and tossed both 10's in the trash can. Still shoot the OM-1, the OM-4 is headed to the shop for CLA.
Rick
-
 Originally Posted by ralnphot  My OM-1 and OM-4 are both smaller than my Contax 139Q, and the OM-1 weighs one ounce less with the winder-2 attached compared to the Contax with winder. If the 110 format was still viable, then the Pentax 110 would far and away beat almost everything on the market.
Rick No doubt the OM4 is a superior machine. But are you sure that the OMs are smaller than the 139Q (without winders attached)? I have never seed an Olympus and a Contax side by side, but I found the following dimensions and weights in the specifications (Wikipedia and the Contax 139Q manual, respectively):
Contax 139Q: 85.5 mm x 135 mm x 50 mm, 500 g
Olympus OM4: 87 mm x 139 mm x 50 mm, 540 g
Last edited by frdrx; 02-03-2010 at 05:39 PM.
Reason: Wrong quote.
-
Originally Posted by frdrx No doubt the OM4 is a superior machine. But are you sure that the OMs are smaller than the 139Q (without winders attached)? I have never seed an Olympus and a Contax side by side, but I found the following dimensions and weights in the specifications (Wikipedia and the Contax 139Q manual, respectively):
Contax 139Q: 85.5 mm x 135 mm x 50 mm, 500 g
Olympus OM4: 87 mm x 139 mm x 50 mm, 540 g If these dimensions don't include the lenses, this comparison may not answer the question.
The Olympus Zuiko lenses contribute greatly to the small size of the system.
Matt
-
Originally Posted by MattKing If these dimensions don't include the lenses, this comparison may not answer the question.
The Olympus Zuiko lenses contribute greatly to the small size of the system.
Matt Of course. It is true that Contax lenses aren't particularly small, possibly with the exception of the 45 mm Tessar.
-
Originally Posted by ralnphot ...tossed both 10's in the trash can. Off topic but for community info, OM10 prisms are identical replacements for the OM1.
Many OM1s suffer the 'green-gunge' prism problem from melted foam. I have fixed a few OM1s with OM10 donor prisms.
-
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
-
How about a Nikon N75 with a 28-80 F3.5/5.6 AF-G lens. Total weight, including batteries 621 grams. 139mm X 91mm x 66mm (body). This is a NICE camera, pretty full-featured.
-
Originally Posted by Peter de Groot Useless... Please.....enlighten us further.
2F/2F
"Truth and love are my law and worship. Form and conscience are my manifestation and guide. Nature and peace are my shelter and companions. Order is my attitude. Beauty and perfection are my attack."
- Rob Tyner (1944 - 1991)
-
Re: the OM10
An OMG (aka OM20) is as light as an OM10, has a built in manual exposure function, and has most of the design "peculiarities" of the OM10 corrected.
I have two of them, and they have been very reliable.
Matt
-
Originally Posted by 2F/2F Please.....enlighten us further. I consider this more like a toy camera then a serious slr camera. The ones that I have seen where not fully manual and of course the negative size has it's serious limitations if you want to make failry big enlargements. Maybe the word useless was a bit strong :-) More then a play around with I didn't do but boy do I want one. Just for fun ;-)
-
I'd recommend an OM series camera, the lenses for it are really spot-on, cheap, pin-sharp fast prime lenses. Get a 28mm f2.8, 50mm f1.8, 100mm f2.8 and you're sorted.
| |
Adv Reply
