Quote Originally Posted by dsmccrac View Post
Hi ken. I am not sure if you have some insider information and i am not sure what you mean by 'heavy' but I don't agree that the OM system was not designed for 'heavy professional use'. I may concede that they may not have been designed for 'ham fisted (north) Americans' (I have added the 'north' to include us occasionally ham fisted canucks.)

In fact I remember olympus making much of the use of the om1 as a favorite of war photos in the Vietnam war where the size of the kit mattered.

So to recap, I am not saying they are as or more robust (or less for that matter) than nikons of the day, but to clarify that it was intended as a pro camera. Pound per pound they are certainly durable, as my original om2 (which bounced around India with me in the eighties) can attest to! ;-)
That information about Olympus deciding to "beef up" the OM's original film advance components was told directly to me by an Olympus Regional salesman. At the time, I was managing a large retail camera shop in NJ. We had a few OM film advance failures early on, which Olympus quickly fixed, and then assured us that the "problem had been identified and corrected."

The size and weight of the OM System were the big selling points, as well as the large viewfinder. Certainly, OM cameras were used in Vietnam, but the Nikon F was far and away the camera of choice because of it's heavy-duty construction.