30 years to get back to where I started. The Olympus OM1n and I.

[MattKing]

FWIW, in modern terms.
Canon and Nikon both have programs that support professional photographers - expedited servicing, equipment loans, etc.
But to qualify, not only do you need to prove that you make your living with their equipment, you have to own the right products.
A Canon 5D Mark IV doesn't qualify you whereas a Canon EOS-1D X Mark II (or probably Mark I) will.

 

[Ricardo Miranda]

that rough film advance. Perhaps we Peruvians are brute with equipment. And i fear of the past stories concerning the OM 1's film advance mechanism.

Not all my OM-1 have a smooth film advance, but I wouldn't say they are rough. I've had Pentax Spotmatic that were rougher.
Even the oldest OM-1 I have, a non-MD, that doesn't seem to have had a CLA in its 40+ years is quite smooth and still has the original light seals working perfectly well.

 

[Ricardo Miranda]

If you need a camera permanently ready, and it'll live in the foot well of a car and generally live a hard life, the OM wouldn't be my first choice.

The OM I use at the moment is always with me and on the streets is more often in my hands (that's how a dropped one into asphalt!).

 

[Hubigpielover]

My Konica FT-1 recently crapped out which was kind of a good thing because it was getting harder and harder to see out of. I looked for an SLR that wasn't stupidly priced, had a bright viewfinder, and was mechanical. After doing a ton of research, it looked like the early OM system was for me. I purchased a OM-1 MD for 40 bucks got a 50mm f1.4 and so far I have been happy. Only put two roles through it and am waiting to get it developed.

What I really like about it is that it is compact and if I am sneaky no one knows if I am taking a picture. Also the viewfinder is really bright. It is a little weird to get use to setting f stops but nothing using it cannot fix.


I need to send it in because my mirror is getting stuck in the upright position and my meter isn't working. No worries, I will send it off. Has anyone in the states used ACR or Camtech? What do you think of them? How do you like the battery conversion?


In conclusion.....OMs are awesome. Would I like a Leica or a Nikon? Maybe if I had the money. I think I would rather have a darkroom and buy books and film.


Edit: Any suggestions on lens to get would be awesome.

 

[blockend]

Perhaps i should start another thread.?
But this Nikon/Olympus discussion is a topic i have wondered about from time to time.......What is a "Professional SLR" .?
Sometimes just being first in the door gets you a long ways to being "the best".
Was the Nikon F2/F3 a better or better built camera than what was offered at the same time by:
Canon
Olympus
Minolta
Pentax
I certainly SAW more Nikons at Sporting/Entertainment events...but i do not know if that means they made a "better" camera.
I see the term Professional and Consumer Level used all the time, but i am not sure (other than price) what really separates the two.
Did camera companies use that term.? Did Minolta, or whoever, say This Is Our Professional Camera.?
Would a (whatever example you want to use) Canon AE-1P fall apart or break often if used by a professional Newspaper/Magazine/Sports/Travel photographer.?
Thank You

Back in the day most pros used Nikon because most pros used Nikon. The brand offered practical advantages like fast replacement, repair and hire locally, and psychological support from the fact everyone knew its strengths and potential weaknesses. If a camera pays the rent, notional technical advantages are much less important than the fact the shutter goes click every time it is pressed. Were other cameras better? Possibly, at some times and in some ways but Nikon owners were a conservative bunch. The F lingered in professional bags long after the introduction of the F2, and the F2 survived the F3, which was available concurrently with subsequent pro film Nikons.

A professional camera is any camera used by a professional, in the same way that art is anything produced by an artist. It might be a Holga to shoot a presidential election (it's been done), a Yashica point and shoot for high end fashion photography (ditto), or the banks of digital Canikon DSLRs at any sporting event. However some cameras are built will an amateur lifespan in mind, with the use of plastic gears and a less robust shutter mechanism, and some are built to withstand a high speed motordrive running year after year. It doesn't mean one takes better photographs, but it strongly suggests it will take more photographs without requiring repair. A camera in sick bay is not earning its keep, so pros gravitate to cameras that survive. It's fair to say the use Nikon owners gave their cameras ensured any glitches were ironed out quickly (and sometimes quietly) by Nikon HQ, and nothing resembling an incipient flaw was allowed to survive. Clearly those attributes may not be of interest or use to an amateur putting 30 films a year through their camera.

 

[klownshed]

Clearly those attributes may not be of interest or use to an amateur putting 30 films a year through their camera.

That's a good point.

A Pro body is also more likely to have been owned by a pro and heavily used and abused.

There can't be many people shooting a film camera today like a pro did when it was new. Pros have moved on.

And whatever the camera, it's going to want some CLA TLC to be at its best after 40 odd years.

 

[blockend]

That's a good point.

A Pro body is also more likely to have been owned by a pro and heavily used and abused.

That's generally the case. My experience with buying old film cameras is professional models were always in worse condition that amateur cameras that have spent their lives in a well padded bag. There's usually a sweet spot between pro system models, and amateur kit that offers the best of both worlds.

 

[CMoore]

That does seem to sum it up pretty well.
Thank You

 

[faberryman]

...my camera is better than your camera...blah, blah, blah...

Seriously, both camera systems will take excellent photographs. Pick the one that fits most comfortably in your hands and is intuitive to you in its handling. Using one or the other won't make you a better photographer.

 

[mynewcolour]

There can't be many people shooting a film camera today like a pro did when it was new. Pros have moved on.

Not strictly true. Look at glossy weekend supplements, fashion magazines and websites. Medium format (67 mostly) and occasionally large format film photography still features.

I know of quite a few fashion and portrait photographers shoot all or mostly film.

 

[klownshed]

Not strictly true..,

The key word was 'many'. Not many pros use film. Some, sure, quite a few, why not? 'Many'? No.

 

[mynewcolour]

The key word was 'many'. Not many pros use film. Some, sure, quite a few, why not? 'Many'? No.

True. Pro's have largely moved on.

 

[klownshed]

largely

;-)

 

[OlyMan]

Newby here, sorry to resurrect a slightly old thread, but I discovered both this forum and this thread while basically scouting around the internet to see if anyone but me still used OM film cameras. Film photograph in general is a minority interest in 2017, and even when it was popular, Olympus were much less of a default choice than Nikon and Canon.

I've been inspired a bit to read through this thread and discover that at least a small chosen few of us are still using these cameras after all these years. My weapon of choice will always be my beloved OM4Ti, but also in my arsenal is my OM1ɴ which I use with ZA675 hearing aid batteries, an OM2SP and the much underrated OM40 aka OM-PC. I also have an OM10QD which I inherited from my dad when he gave up photography many years ago, but I treat that more as a family heirloom which I don't put to use.

 

[Svenedin]

I have 4 Olympus OM4-Ti cameras and these lenses (all OM Zuiko)

Primes

24mm f2.8
28mm f2.8 (x3)
35mm f2.8
50mm f1.8 (x3)
50mm f1.4
100mm f2.8
135mm f2.8
200mm f4

Zooms

35-70mm f3.5/4.5 (for me this is a very useful lens)
35-70mm f4
75-150mm f4

My favourite lens is the 50mm f1.4 even though this is a fairly recent acquisition. I've never been able to justify the extra cost, weight and bulk of the faster versions of most of the lenses. I would quite like the 85mm f2 but I hardly ever take portraits so I probably will never get one (it is an expensive lens). I would not mind a macro lens but again it would not get much use.

 

[MattKrull]

My weapon of choice will always be my beloved OM4Ti, but also in my arsenal is my OM1ɴ which I use with ZA675 hearing aid batteries, an OM2SP and the much underrated OM40 aka OM-PC. I also have an OM10QD which I inherited from my dad when he gave up photography many years ago, but I treat that more as a family heirloom which I don't put to use.

Good choices. The OM-2SP and OM-40 are my go-to travel cameras. I've got a lot of cameras to chose from (talk about a first world problem), but if I'm getting on a plane you can be sure one of those two and a 50mm f1.8 will be in my bag.

 

[CMoore]

.....and even when it was popular, Olympus were much less of a default choice than Nikon and Canon.

.

OlyMan -
I THINK it was more of a Problem-Issue-Stigma back when Canon Vs Nikon and Film were what Photography WAS.
Now that film is an "Obsolete Technology" i think everybody knows that most of those cameras were very well made. People still have their Favorite/Preference of course.
Nikon hit a home run with their Model F, was it in 1959-60, and by the time other camera makers "caught up" i think Nikon had become the default standard.
It happens with many products in many fields. Take construction for example. There is NO TOOL called a Skilsaw, it is a worm-drive circular saw. But Skil was the early leader and became the standard for many years.
There are many capable circular saws from other manufactures.
Being "First" can often be a Huge Advantage over the competition.
But Anyway.....i own 2x OM1n. I am in process of having them both (eventually) put straight by that Zuiko Guy. Is his name John Herman.? He has quite a long wait list as he does camera repair on a part-time basis. But he really seems to know the Olympus OM, and i have other 35mm bodies, so i am willing to wait.
I also took a chance on a 300 dollar OM3 from Ebay. I sent that to another Tech that advertises on APUG. He said it is basically a good camera ad can be put back to level. So i think i got luck with That Gamble.
I only have a limited experience actually using the ones i own. .......but they seem to be a great SLR.
Good Luck With Yours

 

[OlyMan]

Good choices. The OM-2SP and OM-40 are my go-to travel cameras. I've got a lot of cameras to chose from (talk about a first world problem), but if I'm getting on a plane you can be sure one of those two and a 50mm f1.8 will be in my bag.

Yeah I find them both much underrated. Nor did I ever have an issue with their so-called notorious battery drain problems. Not sure if I was just lucky and got the good ones, or whether it's more to do with the fact that (a) I always store them in Bulb position which I quickly learned turns off all the electronics, and (b) I always made sure to store them in a way where nothing could lean on the shutter release and wake up the meter.

 

[OlyMan]

also took a chance on a 300 dollar OM3 from Ebay. I sent that to another Tech that advertises on APUG. He said it is basically a good camera ad can be put back to level. So i think i got luck with That Gamble.
I only have a limited experience actually using the ones i own. .......but they seem to be a great SLR.
Good Luck With Yours

Thanks CMoore. OM3 and OM3Ti are definitely cameras I'd love to try, but the collectors' prices they now fetch prevents that I'm afraid. I realise sticking my OM4Ti in manual mode doesn't quite give me the exact same exquisite experience of mating state of the art multi-spot metering technology with a fully mechanical shutter, but it's likely as close as I'll ever get.