Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,767   Posts: 1,484,161   Online: 795
      
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 50
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    79
    i'd wholeheartedly recommend the OM-2n. It's near impossible for the camera to expose a shot incorrectly. And the viewfinder is MUCH better than the one found in a Nikon FE. Bear in mind, that the OM-2n only accepts film up to ASA 1600. I wanted a faster higher end shutter speed. I sold my OM-2n and picked up an OM-4T. Loved the OM-4T, but the OM-2n feels much better in your hands.

    Sold my OM-4T off (including 24mm f/2.8, 50mm f/1.8, 50mm f/1.4, and 85mm f/2.0) as mine began locking up intermittently.

    Now I shoot a Nikon FM2n. Believe it or not, but it's been much cheaper and easier trying to procure lenses for my FM2n. It's a love/hate relationship with the FM2n. Love, because it's so damn reliable. Hate, because the viewfinder sucks, it's not as quiet as the OM-2n, it's bigger than the OM-2n, and the optics do not have the same character as OM lenses.

    I really feel like OM-2n and Olympus gear has increased substantially in price recently, while manual focus Nikon gear seems to sit, or decrease in value.

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Eastern Kansas
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    275
    Images
    1
    I have both an OM-2 and FE2. I should probably like the FE2 more than I do, but the metering is off so I usually shoot in manual mode and use a handheld incident meter. That sort of defeats the purpose of having a built in meter. Nor do I care for the way the winding lever has to be out to the detent to activate the meter and take a picture.

    The OM-2 on the other hand, has a most excellent metering system and is generally extremely accurate. It handles very well too and so easy to read the shutter speed in the viewfinder.

    Both cameras were picked up used and I had to send the OM-2 to John, who posted above, for a CLA. It is now like new.

    Dave

  3. #13
    BobD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    California, USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    433
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr.Pain-MD View Post
    What I like about my Nikon FE was that it could automatically time exposures for many minutes (hours even supposedly).
    This is news to me and I've used Nikon FE/FE2 for many years. Have you actually done this with an FE?
    I don't find this mentioned on any FE spec sheet. Just 8 seconds max shutter speed.

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    1,632
    Images
    5
    Good Afternoon, Dr. Pain,

    I concur with the generally favorable comments made by the previous responders. Following the OM-4 was the availability of the OM-2000 which was not a "real Olympus," but which accepts Olympus lenses. OM-2000's have the advantages of being relatively newer and, more significantly, employing a vertically-running shutter which allows for a 1/125 sync speed, and taking easily-available A76 batteries. They also offer either spot or averaging meters. While I very much like my classic OM-1n, I also find my two OM-2000 bodies get regular use.

    Konical

  5. #15
    darinwc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2,015
    Images
    157
    There is nothing wrong with the Nikon FE/FE2 series. Don't let your experience with one body influence your perception of the group. If you already have some lenses there is no reason to switch.

    The OM2 compares very well with the FE/FE2. Both systems are reliable, but being vintage cameras you should set some money aside for a repair or CLA.

    Regarding lenses, it can be downright hard to find some of the lenses for the OM and they dont come cheap. Each system has its sought-after lenses and its bargains.
    Go not to the elves for counsel, for they will say both yes and no.

  6. #16
    Pumalite's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Here & Now
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,078
    I used to take laparoscopy pictures with the OM-1. Never failed. Today I have 2 OM-1, 2 OM-1n, 2 OM-2, 2 OM-2n, 2 OM-4Ti. Meters excellent, lenses extraordinary.
    " A loving and caring heart is the beginning of all knowledge " ~ Thomas Carlyle ~

  7. #17

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    South Carolina
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    65
    Here is a site that you need to check out. It's dedicated to Olypmus cameras and lenses. Ebay has Om,s as well as lenses. I have three Om's and a XA and love them.

    http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography.../om1/index.htm

    There are still people who repairs them. Here is are a few :

    http://www.garryscamera.com/

    http://www.lezot.com/servlet/the-14/...M1-OM-1/Detail

    http://www.zuiko.com/

    There are more.
    Last edited by alapin; 07-08-2011 at 07:19 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Minneapolis, MN US
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,089
    Images
    4
    I think Zuiko glass is more expensive and harder to find than Nikon glass (other than the common 28, 35, 50, 135 lenses). I don't think build quality is an issue. I love my OM-2n and OM-1n. Only negative in my mind is the flash shoe.
    "Far more critical than what we know or do not know is what we do not want to know." - Eric Hoffer

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    793
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr.Pain-MD View Post
    - A big concern for me was reading that the aperture priority caps the shutter at 120 seconds on the OM-2. What I like about my Nikon FE was that it could automatically time exposures for many minutes (hours even supposedly). Is it true that you cannot go past the measly 2 minutes?

    True on both counts. However, the Nikons with aperture priority auto exposure will determine exposure time when shutter is depressed and maintain that regardless of any changes in the scene. OTOH, the OM2 has OTF (off the film) metering and will constantly monitor the scene and adjust accordingly - longer/shorter as suited.

    Only the Pentax LX has OTF to constantly monitor the scene and adjust accordingly as well as take a very long exposure. I have successfully achieved hour and a half exposures with it.

  10. #20
    narsuitus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    517
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr.Pain-MD View Post
    I'm also open to any other advice regarding the OM vs Nikon system debate, let's hear what you can say. Thanks!
    Both Nikon and Olympus make fine cameras. I have owned and used the Nikon F, F2, F3, and F4 and the Olympus EP-1. I have never used an Olympus OM, Nikon FM, or Nikon FE series camera. However, I did develop opinions as I considered them for possible purchase.

    The reason I considered them for purchase was that there were times when I needed to use an SLR that was smaller, lighter, and expendable.

    Since I have always preferred manual/mechanical cameras to automatic/electronic cameras, the Nikon FE camera series was never high on my list.

    Higher on my list were the FM series cameras. I liked all of the FM series except the FM10. On two occasions I came very close to buying an FM series camera but did not for the following reasons:
    1. The FM cameras were smaller and lighter but were either too good or too expensive to be expendable. I ended up purchasing a lower priced Nikon EM instead and later replaced the EM with a Nikon N70 body that cost less than $100.
    2. When I needed an extra body, I almost bought a Nikon FM3a. However, at the time, there was so little difference in price between the FM3a and the Nikon F4 that I decided to buy the F4 instead.

    I have always considered the Olympus OM-1 as one of the most attractive looking 35mm SLR cameras. The Nikon F2 with a meterless DE-1 prism viewfinder was just as attractive but the Olympus with its built-in light meter was more functional. I was seriously considering buying the OM-1 but did not for the following reasons:
    1. It was too good and too expensive to be expendable.
    2. I did not like the location of the shutter speed control.
    3. Photographers reported that the OM cameras did not hold up as well as Nikons when subjected to daily use and abuse.
    4. I stumbled upon a good deal on a Pentax ME that was even smaller and lighter than the Olympus OM-1. With inexpensive third-party 28-70mm and 80-205mm lenses, this camera serves as my smaller, lighter, and expendable backup.


    Bottom line – I have complete confidence in the Olympus and Nikon 35mm camera systems and I could easily rely on the Olympus OM or Nikon FM camera series to capture the 35mm still images that I need.

Page 2 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