The OM's best feature is weight saving, because without a range of pancake lenses all SLRs have a roughly similar footprint.
That confirms my "roughly similar footprint" observation. Lenses from a given era with the same focal length and maximum aperture are about the same length. There's only around 15% difference between the OM, Pentax K and Canon FD. The 1960s Minolta, Nikon and Canon have about 10% between them.
Sure. Sorry, it is not about Olympus or even SLR.Do others here have similar stories of once favored equipment that has lain dormant to be rediscovered and re-appreciated ?
What lens selection do the OM users here prefer? Going for small size and light weight my 6 selections are the small aperture Zuiko versions.
24mm f2.8
35mm f2.8
50mm f1.8
85mm f2 (well, only one choice here)
135mm f3.5
200mm f5
And one third party lens, only because it was cheap, a Sigma 50mm f2.8 macro that goes to 1:1
All, except for the Sigma, use 49mm filter size, economical and plentiful. For my 24 and 35 I bought a couple of used filters at a camera fair, took the glass out and used the rims to extend the fronts about 4mm. To me the glass on those lenses just seemed too far forward and unprotec
My main selection:What lens selection do the OM users here prefer? Going for small size and light weight my 6 selections are the small aperture Zuiko versions.
24mm f2.8
35mm f2.8
50mm f1.8
85mm f2 (well, only one choice here)
135mm f3.5
200mm f5
Only 4? I don't know if to say lucky man or not!I have 4 bodies to choose from
Only 4? I don't know if to say lucky man or not!
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?