I've just read that crash test for the first time (I didn't know about it).
Interesting, but I think the reviewer makes a very common mistake about the lightmeter of the OM cameras, and I would like to know for certain once and for all:
This is what is said in the crash test about the off the frame metering:
"the shuttercurtain contains a complex, computer-calculated field of white dots. This field stands for an average exposure value for your subject. The field is measured by the meter of the camera the moment the shuytter flips up, just before the shutter opens. By means of this, the camera meter can adjust to a change in lighting of your subject in the very last instant and thus expose correctly".
I think this is plain wrong and doesn't do justice to the ingenuity of the lightmeter.
I always understood that the field of white dots on the shuttercurtain is used by the meter to show you BEFORE the exposure what value it measures, but that it adjusts DURING the exposure by metering directly from the film itself at that moment. So, it does not adjust "in the very last instant", it adjusts really while exposing.
This explains why, when "shooting" without film, the exposure time is quite a bit longer than indicated by the meter before pressing the shutter (you don't have to measure it: it's obvious; try with 1/8th to 1/2 of a second: you'll notice the difference): in that situation, during the "expsoure", the camera sees a "black hole" (the pressure plate), since there's no film, and hence uses a much longer exposure time than indicated right before pressing the shutter.
This is also useful when using the Olympus flash: the camera can cut off the flash even DURING exposure. Imagine a lot of photographers making a picture of the same subject, all at the same time, with flash (e.g. newsreporters): the OM will be able to expose correctly, because it will "see" the flashes of the OTHER cameras during exposure and will adjust accordingly while exposing.
I always understood this the case both with the OM-2 and the OM-4. Considering the time when the OM-2 was made, this was revolutionary (but I think often misunderstood and thus underestimated, and the genius of Maitani should not be underestimated).
I don't know if there is or has ever been another camera that can do this. I don't think so.
Last edited by gliderbee; 01-06-2013 at 05:18 AM. Click to view previous post history.