Going Analog: Olympus OM2 or Canon AE-1?

Vonder · Apr 19, 2009

There are lots of reasons to choose one over the other, reasons "mostly" useless to you. Either camera will work fine. I have an AE-1, in fact, I own one of all Canon's A-series bodies. All are working perfectly. I own only one Olympus, an OM-10, and it is not as reliable as any of my Canons because it was never designed to standards up to the previous OM line. It was made to capture market share. So was the AE-1. The difference is that Canon made a great camera first, that cost a lot, and people liked it and bought it. Olympus started out making superb cameras that few people bought, so they created a lesser (cost and quality) camera in hopes that once people tried Olympus (mainly via the superb Zuiko lenses) they'd invest in more Olympus gear.

Lots of camera makers followed one of those paths. Some worked, some didn't. Some changed course in mid-stream. All in all, what camera will work best for you is the one YOU like best, and that can be from any manufacturer (except Fujica, my opinion, avoid them like the plague) from 1975-1985 or so. Everybody made good stuff then... and those bodies are all OLD now. Some bodies have stood the test of time and some haven't, some will last another 30 years and some are already garbage. Your mileage will vary.

Buy one. If it doesn't work right, repair, return, or get a new one. It's all good.

Rol_Lei Nut · Apr 19, 2009

relix said:
I might also pick up a FED or Zorki just for fun.

Actually, a well-CLA'd (or just a good or *lucky*) Zorky can come quite close to a screw-mount Leica.

The big caveat is: you must buy one from a reputable seller who also repairs them. In that case they can be quite good. Otherwise it's a leap in the dark and you might just join the crowd of those who consider them junk.

The later ones also have several advantages over the real Leicas, namely removable backs for film loading, combined viewfinder/rangefinder windows, sometime lever advance, sometimes all speeds on one dial...
Also, their Zeiss-cloned lenses are (with a good sample) better than early Leica ones.

The early FEDs are o.k. (the ones that look like Leica clones), while the later ones are much shoddier in construction than the Zorkys.

Generally speaking, the ones made in the 1950's and 60's tend to be better than those made later (see first two digits of the serial number).

panastasia · Apr 19, 2009

elekm said:
....I can't recall if the AE-1 had interchangeable screens. The OM-2 did.

As others said, the AE-1 was aimed at the consumer market. At that time, there was discussions about the AE-1 because it was the first camera to use a plastic top deck. And once Canon discovered plastic, it couldn't stop. Unfortunately, it dragged others down this unholy path.

There are some advantages to plastic in that it can take a knock here or there and won't leave a ding. On the other hand, I think it encouraged the camera makers to continue to find ways to cut corners and in the end cheapened the quality of construction (and I mean this in a negative sense).

QUOTE]

Someone gave me the AE-1 Program w/28-100 zoom lens many years ago (w/interchangeable screens). After using this camera, mostly in total manual mode, I was very impressed by it's performance compared to other cameras I owned (Minolta SRT 102; Pentax Spotmatic; Rollie 35). They all seemed to perform equally well as far as image quality goes, therefore I gave the other cameras away and kept the AE-1.

I never had any problems with this camera and couldn't care less how it compares to other cameras for that reason. For me, the difference in built quality doesn't seem to matter because it gets tossed around - greatly abused - and always keeps working. Also, I personally, never considered a 35mm to be a pro camera, any brand. For serious work I shoot with MF. One added plus: the battery used in the AE-1 is the same one used in my Pentax digital spot meter and my newly acquired (used) Mamiya 645 1000s.

Bytesmiths · Apr 19, 2009

My bias is as an Olympus shooter for 30 years, but the reasons I chose an OM-2 in the early '80's remain true today: it a tiny, jewel-like creature.

Be aware that there is a difference between the OM-2 and the OM-2n. The former would do outlandishly long automatic exposures -- the better part of an hour! But this also meant they were prone to going off "in the bag" and running down their batteries, so the 2n got a 120 second (I think) max exposure timer.

Another difference is system flash compatibility. With the OM-2, you'll need the Quick Auto 310 flash if you want to do off-the-film flash exposure, whereas the OM-2n will use the much more accessible T-series flashes (T-30, T-20, T-45, and the T Power Control for macro)

In my case, it was macro that sold me. With its off-the-film metering, the OM-2 will auto-expose through anything you attach to the front, including bellows, reversing rings, etc., whereas the AE-1 will not -- you will have to do exposure calculations with bellows and other such things. The Zuiko line of macro lenses is superb and world-class, albeit still pricey.

FilmOnly · Apr 19, 2009

I really enjoyed the AE-1 Program I had, and should not have sold it. The focusing screen in the AE-1P is supposed to be an improvement over the original AE-1. I went with the Program model for that reason, as I never use anything but manual mode. What a great handler the AE-1P is--especially with the Winder A2. I also like the original AE-1. My only complaint about that camera is the flashing "M" in manual mode. I found it a tad distracting.

aluncrockford · Apr 19, 2009

Having owned both I would say that the AE1 is by far the easiest to use ,also there are a lot more second hand lenses available,and I would have to agree that the A1 is a better choice than either ,try http://apertureuk.com but if you really want to get back to basics with fillm just get hold of a Leica M2 and a weston .The M2 might be a little more money but it will last a lifetime

relix · Apr 26, 2009

Thanks everyone for your replies!

I finally won an auction on eBay for a Yashica Electro 35! The auction was not very descriptive so I'm hoping it'll arrive in working condition. I'm sure I'll need to replace the light seals but I just hope the rangefinder and lightmeter are at least accurate.

Will let you guys know if it works once it gets delivered.

Uncle Bill · Apr 26, 2009

Ken N said:
Olympus users are a rather strange bunch. We tend to think of our OM's as usable Leicas.

Would I pick the Canon over an Olympus of this era? Well, let's put it this way--the late Herbert Keppler's personal axe of choice was the Olympus. That should say something.

Agreed, got three Olympus and they are the SLR equivalent of the Leica M series rangefinder.

Ektagraphic · Apr 26, 2009

I vote for the AE-1. Simply a wonderful machine with a great line up of lenses to go along with it.

Ken N · Apr 26, 2009

Uncle Bill said:
Agreed, got three Olympus and they are the SLR equivalent of the Leica M series rangefinder.

I have an OM-3Ti that just seems to prefer not having any motordrive attached. Even though the shell of the single-digit OM-bodies are all identical, for some odd reason the 3Ti just feels different. It also has that slick purring sound of a mechanical shutter. The 4T is slightly quieter at longer shutter speeds, but has a different metallic "tang" sound.

When running the OM bodies solo (without winders/motordrives) they feel like extensions of your eye. What sweet machines they are. But when you put the motordrives on them (including the awesome 5fps MD2), they are competitive beasts with the latest in digital wonderbricks.

But those lenses, oh, the lenses... Zuiko lenses draw the scene differently than other Japanese lenses. Definitely more European in look.

Pumal · Apr 28, 2009

I place my Zuiko lenses second only to my Super-Multicoated Takumars.

John Hermanson · Apr 28, 2009

Bytesmiths said:
My bias is as an Olympus shooter for 30 years, but the reasons I chose an OM-2 in the early '80's remain true today: it a tiny, jewel-like creature.

Another difference is system flash compatibility. With the OM-2, you'll need the Quick Auto 310 flash if you want to do off-the-film flash exposure, whereas the OM-2n will use the much more accessible T-series flashes (T-30, T-20, T-45, and the T Power Control for macro)

Plain OM-2 works fine in OTF flash mode with any T flash, just use Shoe 3. All TTL cords compatible when used with TTL Connector 3. John

nicefor88 · May 2, 2009

OM2 definitely, as far as I'm concerned.

relix · May 15, 2009

So I've finally bought a Yashica Electro 35. It arrived this week and although it's in a really excellent cosmetical condition, it appears to be suffering from the "pad of death". Since I've got finals now, I'll have to wait 'till July to be able to open him up and fix it.

Pumal · May 15, 2009

Don't forget to replace light seals too.
http://www.mattdentonphoto.com/cameras/light_seals/index.html

snowblind · May 15, 2009

Even though the O/P appears to have already made their choice, I'd just like to chime in and say that there's not much wrong with the OM-10, if the comparison is between consumer grade cameras. They're very reliable and take all the system lenses and flashes and a power winder too. In fact, they were the recommended camera for photography students for years. Some people don't like the Olympus shutter speed control mounted around the lens but the OM-10 has it away from there via the (separately, though readily and cheaply, available) manual adapter. With the adapter in place, you still don't have to take your finger off the button because it's on the left front of the camera and an added advantage to the adapter -- one I've found anyway but never heard anyone else mention -- is that you can get/make a cheap extension cable for it and operate the shutter speed control remotely from the camera. Doing that, in conjunction with a power winder and remote control, means you can bracket shots on a tripod without touching the camera at all.

John Hermanson · May 16, 2009

The OM-10 was introduced at PMA at the same time as the Nikon EM and Canon AV-1. The AV-1 had an all plastic body casting. Original OM-10 had plastic top, metal bottom and cast aluminum body casting. It tends to suffer from exposure problems caused by oily magnet. Also, the OM-10 had plastic shutter curtain shafts, would work with a winder, but will not fire the motor drives. It's an okay backup body (imo) but I wouldn't rely on it. Newer OM-10 above serial number 2,000,000 had a new modular shutter where they moved the magnet up front and out of harms way. Better as far as oily magnet goes but not perfect. John, www.zuiko.com

Excalibur2 · May 17, 2009

***Original OM-10 had plastic top, metal bottom and cast aluminum body casting. It tends to suffer from exposure problems caused by oily magnet.***

..and either you are someone else explained how to solve this problem with some lighter fuel, mind you when it let me down for some important shots I could have used lighter fuel to burn it...horrible, stupid designed, camera.

Karl C · May 17, 2009

FilmOnly said:
I really enjoyed the AE-1 Program I had, and should not have sold it. The focusing screen in the AE-1P is supposed to be an improvement over the original AE-1. I went with the Program model for that reason, as I never use anything but manual mode. What a great handler the AE-1P is--especially with the Winder A2. I also like the original AE-1. My only complaint about that camera is the flashing "M" in manual mode. I found it a tad distracting.

I began photography in 1982 with AE-1P and it served me well for 15 years. I then got out of photography for a period of time and returned five years ago with a 20D. Sold the AE-1P and it was in mint condition (HUGE mistake). I had the itch to shoot film occasionally, so I bought a beautiful A-1 from KEH. Interestingly, I didn't find the A-1 as enjoyable as the AE-1P. Can't tell you why either - just couldn't get in the groove with it.

Recently, I purchased a mint Oly Zuiko Auto-W 28mm f/2.8 for use on my 5D. I've toyed with purchasing an Oly body to complement the lens (and times when I want to shoot film) but, after reading this thread, I wonder if going back to an AE-1P would better suit me.

Either way, some very good information in this thread.

snowblind · May 17, 2009

Well, I might say the OM-10 is "very reliable" but it's not like mine is overused or anything. Still, only time it ever left me down was when the mirror started locking half way up before the shutter fired. That was completely down to a dead battery as it happened. Of course it's not the best 35mm SLR ever made but I sure do like my remote shutter speed control ;-)

Pumal · May 17, 2009

I have 2 OM-10. Never a problem.

Going Analog: Olympus OM2 or Canon AE-1?

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency