Wonder if it's Cosina or Phenix who makes these
Originally Posted by baachitraka
I am little disappointed they do not have OM mount...but
is rather very interesting esp., 1/4000s
OM-1n: Do I need to own a Leica?
Rolleicord Va: Humble.
Holga 120GFN: Amazingly simple yet it produces outstanding negatives to print.
I agree with Rick A.
I have used OM1's since the 70's and typically I just set the shutter speed to something appropriate based on lighting, and when I bring the camera to eye, I can quickly adjust the aperture to center the needle. Usually only need move it one stop one way or the other. (plus if I need a quick shot, I'll be close enough to get it). I guess I could say I use my OM1 in shutter-priority mode
Although I prefer Olympus' superior control positions, my method would work with any brand camera since I don't change shutter speeds every shot.
With the OM4, it's the opposite for me. I set the aperture according to the depth of field I want and then let the camera select the shutter speed. It's a slightly different way of shooting.
All the menus and viewfinder displays distract one from concentrating on the picture. You don't need to waste time looking around in the viewfinder for tech info. Use that time to frame your picture and pay attention to your subjects.
If I were in your position, my first choice would be to buy another Nikon FM series camera (except FM10).
My second choice would be to repair my broken FM bodies.
Third choice would be to invest in a new system. I primarily shoot Nikon but when I need a compact manual camera, I use a Pentax Spotmatic with some high quality Takumar lenses. I have never used a Nikon FM camera because I was using Spotmatics long before the FM existed. However, when I really need compact, I use a Pentax ME, which is smaller and lighter than the Olympus OM1.
My dad is a Pentax-guy. I think he has some nice glass, I'll borrow it and see if I like it.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Pentax is a decent choice, lotsa cheap glass for them, most manual bodies hold up fairly well.
Agree. My first SLR was a Pentax SV purchased at the PX in Vietnam in 1967. I still have it and it functions as well today as back in '67.
Originally Posted by Rick A
The problem, I guess, is finding a house with at least 2000th shutter speed
It's pretty much all been said above:
If you want compact, robust SLR then it's Olympus (take your pick, other than OM10). But expect to pay a premium for used lenses (even compared to Nikon).
Perhaps one of the later Pentax manual focus SLRs (like ME Super) for compact, lots of bang for the buck, maybe not quite as robust.
Minolta XE and XD for reasonably robust bodies (esp. XE) and inexpensive but high quality glass. Not especially compact.
I think Nikon N90s is biggest bang for the buck in AF bodies (surprising how cheap they go for) but not compact (and not MF).
"Far more critical than what we know or do not know is what we do not want to know." - Eric Hoffer
I use both Konica T3 and TC (and an FS-1, but I always think it is giving up the ghost when it automatically advances the film..). The lenses are nice - good contrast and colour. I shot TC with 50mm 1.7 and FM2n with 50mm 1.4 AF, side-by-side, and had films from both processed by same shop. This is how I shoot, these are the guys I use for developing, so the comparison was relevant to me. And I actually preferred the look of the AR lens. I don't use my cameras heavily, but I've heard the Konicas are not in the same league as Nikons for reliability - no surprise here. The shutters are loud, viewfinders a bit dark (certainly on the TC, the T3 is quite good in my opinion). The T3 is heavy, big and... well, lurvly. As for the lenses - you can still get 28mm (loads of them around), some 50mms, and the occasional 40mm pancake, but the more rare lenses are not cheap, and hard to find - the only source I know of is fleebay, and I also found 135mm f3.2 from camera-house-uk. I'm a bit disappointed that I can't get more Konica lenses for a reasonable price.