For Trade Olympus OM-1 & 2n

[guitstik]

I find myself in a position of joy and sadness. My daughter is in her final year of highschool and will be graduating this year. For the longest time she has not wanted me to do any of her portraits so I had resigned myself to that fact and not focused on those items that I would need for such as I had generally consigned my focus to architectural and nature photography (check out my gallery, no portraits). The few portraits I have done over the years have been with either a 50 or a 135 lens, neither of which are the best for such. I did have the use of an 85/2 Minolta lens several years ago but alas that is no longer available.

The long and short of it is that now she wants me to do her senior portraits and she has put me in the position of also doing those of her friends, mind you without asking me first. So now I am looking to include an 85/2 Minolta to my arsenal of glass and as money has been stung tight due the construction of our new house I must offer my Oly gear to that endeavor.

What I have to offer is an OM-1 and a 2n both in great shape but for the 2 that needs a battery cover that I managed to lose. I also have a 24/2,8 a 50/1,8 and a 75-150/4 all H, Zuiko glass. I also hav a Soligor 75-260/4,5 as well as a Vivitar 70-210/4,5.

I can supply pictures but as of now my world is in chaos due to all the moving and shuffling about so it may take time the same goes if you PM me but I will answer as I can.

Thank you

 

[Rick A]

Why dont you just pick up a Zuiko 100/2.8 for the Oly's and have a better portrait lens. If you have any medium format gear, you have better portrait possibilities. A Yashica 6x6 will outperform any 35mm/lens combo.

 

[guitstik]

Rick, I had thought of that but as of now my Minolta gear out numbers my Oly gear by about 5:1 and that is just bodies. I have an 80 for both of my Mamiyas but I kinda wanted to use the Minolta gear as I have more of an emotional attachment to it (I know, stupid). Plus, adding the 85 to my 35mm gear gives me a little more flexibility because I would like to start doing more portrait work, albeit somewhat more esoteric than the run of the mill portrait studios.

 

[Rick A]

I wish I'd known about that, I just gave away some Minolta stuff you could have used. Again, I will recommend a 100mm for portraits. It will allow you to get a tad further away from your subject to avoid distortion while staying close enough to be personal and pick up more detail. The 85mm's I've used were disappointing(here comes the posts-pro 85). You may want to try both to find which you prefer.

 

[guitstik]

Just my luck, if I believed in such. A day late and a dollar short.

The 100's I've used have been fairly decent and I do have the 135's that are close enough to do the job but I was looking to get right in that sweet spot that the 85 fills. I would consider and may still buy a 100 from KEH. But if any one has an 85/1,7 that would be good also.

Rick, I think I remember when you got rid of your Minolta gear. Don't tell me what you had I may cry.

 

[Rick A]

I'll send you a box of tissue and a list

In the meanwhile-- All you folks looking for decent Olympus gear, buy it from guitstik. He's a stand up guy and honest, he wont do you wrong.

 

[guitstik]

 

[benjiboy]

Why can't you use the OM1 with the 75-150 Zuiko it's a very good and useful portrait zoom ?

 

[guitstik]

I can and could do just that with either the Oly or Minolta as I have tele's in that range but it has been my experience that when doing portraits it is best to use a fixed focus lens as they are designed to only cover that focal length instead of a tele that is used over a wide range so some compromise is manufactured into it. If I were to use a tele for portraits it would be one that covered a shorter focal length such as a 28-80 or even better an 80-100, neither of which I have.

 

[rberry65]

I have an OM-10 I just bought from a flea market. I am developing film I just took with it to see if it works. If so, will your OM-1 lenses be compatiable with the OM-10? What are you willing to trade for or how much do you want for them?

 

[Rick A]

Answering for guitstik, yes his OM lenses will fit your OM-10. However, you are better off owning an OM 1 or OM-2 and junk the 10(its an entry level camera).

 

[guitstik]

In the meanwhile-- All you folks looking for decent Olympus gear, buy it from guitstik. He's a stand up guy and honest, he wont do you wrong.

Rick, your gonna make me blush. Now I have to live up to that glowing testimonial and make sure that the equipment lives up as advertised and go out to shot it, and we all know what happens then don't we.

As for what I would take for this outfit, check out what KEH has the bodies and lenses going for and you should see that it would be more than a Minolta 85/1,7 they don't have an f2 on there but they go for about $450 on eBay. This kit would not be on the chopping block if I had the wherewithal to be able to purchase this lens. It is not a lens that I just have to have because I could make do with the Equipement that I already own, but this is my only daughter and I want to try to make this something special for the both of us. I want her to be able to exclaim proudly that her daddy took that portrait when people ask. Call me sentimental or just mental.

 

[Rick A]

How about we just call you a proud papa.

 

[rberry65]

As far as knowledge of camera's go, I guess you could say that I am entry level. What is the difference between the two?

 

[nsurit]

The best combination I can think of would be the 85mm f2 or the 100 f2.8. Hmm, maybe the 100mm f2. Bill Barber

 

[Ken N]

The Zuiko 100/2.8 is my "money lens". I've sold more portraits taken with this lens than any other.

 

[guitstik]

I have nothing against the Zuiko lenses or the Olympus cameras. They are fantastic and I use them all the time but I have had long and joyful experience with Minolta and the Rokkor lenses. The price on the Zuiko 100/2,8 is astronomical compared to the same in Minolta glass without much difference in quality, go figure.

Rberry, what two are you referring to? The OM-1 was the first camera in that lineup. The 1n was next then came the 2n. This should give you a breakdown of the differences.
http://camerapedia.wikia.com/wiki/Olympus_OM-1/2/3/4

 

[Rick A]

As far as knowledge of camera's go, I guess you could say that I am entry level. What is the difference between the two?

The OM-1 and OM-2 are pro grade machines, built to take a pounding in the field by people who will do anything to get the money shot. Most of them have never seen that type of use though, therefore you still see plenty of them still in use.
The OM-10 is not even remotely in the same catagory, plastic gears and auto mode only, unless you are fortunate to get the FC control. I bought two of them when they first came out, and neither one lived past two years, one barely making just over one year of service before the gears stripped. They were priced at $99 new, and were disposable. The FC control is worth more than the OM-10 body.
The OM-G was the follow-up to the OM-10, and basically the same camera, but with the glitches worked out. As far as I know, the G still utilized plastic internals and short life span.

 

[rberry65]

Oh great, my OM-10 has a short life span. That sucks being two of my favorite camera's ( Minolta XE-7, and Canon AE-1) have recently kicked the buckett. I can still use the XE-7, but the light meter is gone and it puts a small scratch along the top of my film. Guitstik, I thought I might have the lens you were looking for, but turns out that I do not. It is a vivitar series 1, 35-85mm 1:2.8. It looks like a pretty good lens. Had it for several yeasr, but have never used it.

 

[guitstik]

It seems that I now have a lens to use for my daughters senior portraits. It's not the Minolta 85/2 that I was looking for but thanks to Rick A I will have Zuiko 100/2,8 to use with the OM cameras. So it appears that I will be holding on to all of it and not trading today. Thanks Rick for the use of that lens.

 

[MattKing]

Oh great, my OM-10 has a short life span. That sucks being two of my favorite camera's ( Minolta XE-7, and Canon AE-1) have recently kicked the buckett. I can still use the XE-7, but the light meter is gone and it puts a small scratch along the top of my film. Guitstik, I thought I might have the lens you were looking for, but turns out that I do not. It is a vivitar series 1, 35-85mm 1:2.8. It looks like a pretty good lens. Had it for several yeasr, but have never used it.

I wouldn't say that an OM-10 has a short life span - after all, yours has lasted this long .

An OM-10 is certainly less robust than an OM-2, but there are thousands (millions?) of them out there that still work fine - because if you use reasonable care with an OM-10, and don't encounter any serious bad luck, it will probably function fine.

Personally, I prefer an OM-20/OM-G among the consumer grade OM bodies. The built in manual exposure option is enough of a difference for me.

 

[danfogel]

I have a Rokkor 45/2 and am enticed by your zuiko 24/2,8. I am pretty sure that isn't a fair trade for you. PM me if I am on to something.