Olympus OM-10 or Canon AE-1?

[Andrei Machado]

Hello there, I have a hard question for you guys (at least is for me).

I'm looking for a cheap and good 35mm camera, and by doing some price x benefit research I ended with with these two models, Olympus OM-10 and Canon AE-1. I know that both cameras are great and can satisfy anyone (and they're costing the same, thats make my choise even more difficult), but I really want buy knowing that I'm doing the best deal on buying the best camera, and cause of that I would really appreciate if you guys could help me with some questions I have.

1 - Lens. The impression I got is that Zuiko is a better lens than Canon. The images I've seen around, appears to be, in most of the cases, sharper and with less noise. Is that correct? Is Zuiko lens sharper and less noisy? This is a point that really matters to me. PS: I compared only Zuiko 50mm 1.8mm with Canon FD 50mm 1.8mm, and I dunno how much the ISO settings and lens "health" has incluenced on these photos I've seen.

2 - Features. Wich is easier to use? I know that the Canon controls make its use almost full-automatic, I heard that you can do all the settings without taking the eyes of the viewfinder. Is that true? And I can do that with Olympus also? Wich is more featured?

Well, what else you can say pro and against the both? What is your final opnion about them? Is it possible to say that one is better than the other? Or is it all about personal taste? I'm closer to buying the Olympus, because of the lens thing, so let me know if I'm thinking it right or if the both lens are the same thing. If theres not difference about the quality of both lens, I'll really consider the Canon because of the easy way to handle.

And just in case, is there another better option?

 

[Tony-S]

Can't tell you much about the OM-10 or Oly lenses, but the AE-1 is pretty simple and functional. The FD 50mm f/1.8 was their consumer lens and its optics are ok, but not great. The 50mm f/1.4 is substantially better. You'd be fine with either.

 

[MattKing]

With respect to the OM-10, I would recommend an OM-G (OM-20 in some markets) instead. It usually can be found at a similar price, it has the manual exposure control built in, and it is a later version, so some of the design peculiarities of the OM-10 have been engineered out.

Some of your comments (e.g. your reference to "noise") indicate to me that you are coming at this question from a digital background. That is fine, but it may mean that you may be looking at some factors that have less relevance in a film camera.

With respect to the lenses, I've always liked the Olympus Zuiko 50mm f/1.8. One thing to check for though is that the aperture isn't sticky. Over the years I've seen a few that have gummed up after two or three decades.

I've shot Olympus OM gear for 35 years, and really like the design philosophy. When both the AE-1 and OM-10 were current models, I worked in camera sales and sold both, and wouldn't recommend against either camera. I prefer the OM models though.

With only a little bit more money in your budget, there are a whole bunch of other, more advanced models to consider from either manufacturer.

Matt

 

[tkamiya]

I owned OM-10 some 30 years ago. The only thing I found very annoying was that without an optional adapter, there was no ways to set shutter speed independently. The adapter goes on the front of the camera and the connection is made via ear-phone like plug. Mine developed intermittent contact after few months. The result was, very erratic shutter speed. I don't know if anyone else had this problem as this was WAY before time of Internet forums.

I don't know what you mean by noise. As far as sharpness is concerned, it was more than sharp enough for 35mm films. Limiting factor wasn't the lens.

 

[Andrei Machado]

Thank you very much Tony and Matt.

Tony, I've seen some photos of Canon FD 1.4, it's actually a really great lens. If I decide for Canon, I'll get one myself.

Matt, yes, you're right, I had a Canon Rebel XTi and a Nikon D40 and sold both. Digital don't satisfied me, digital picture are souless for me. Had a change to shoot with a Pentax K1000 from a friend last year and felt in love with 35mm. So, let me give you some examples when I talked about noise. I haven't seen yet a Canon AE-1 picture so much clear and sharp as these (with the regular 1.8):
http://www.flickr.com/photos/davelightseer/2462731100/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/giulia_rossa/2095273379

Notice that these pictures are taken with the Zuiko OM 1.8mm. Is that all about the quality of Zuiko or the film used had influence? The question is: Can I get a result like that with the Canon equivalent (50mm FD 1.8mm)?

Thank you both for the attention.

 

[Excalibur2]

***Can I get a result like that with the Canon equivalent (50mm FD 1.8mm)?***

Indeed if you want sharpness, Canon FD lenses are cheaper too as they are more difficult for the digital guys to use, so less bids to bump up the price.

 

[MattKing]

Andrei:

Both the OM-10 and the AE-1 were current in the late 1970s or so. At that time there were a number of competing manufacturers making 35mm SLRs. Assuming that a lens is undamaged, any major manufacturer's 50mm (or so) standard lens (somewhere between f/1.7 and f/2.0) will give you "clear and sharp" results.

In addition to the Olympus or a Canon 50mm f/1.8 "standard" lenses you have referred to, there are examples from manufacturers like Nikon and Minolta (and others) that will give similar results.

The qualities of the examples you have linked to relate as much to the photographer's technique, the film, the developing and the scanning (for web display) as they do to the lenses.

If I were you I would consider the availability of quality lenses at reasonable prices a given (between Olympus and Canon, anyways) and make my decision instead on questions like ease of use.

Matt

 

[nsurit]

I'd suggest either an OM 1/1n or the OM 2/2n. The few dollars you might save on the body buying an OM 10are not worth the difference in price. The OM 1/1n are fully manual cameras, while the OM 2/2n have an auto feature. If you go with the OM 1/1n you may want to get it altered to take current batteries. Zuiko glass is great as is the Canon. My preference is for the OM (single digit) series of cameras. Bill Barber

 

[Andrei Machado]

I see, Matt. I understand. Buying a camera always make me anxious, sometimes is a shot in the dark. And it's worse when you try to compare with results you see around. It's normal to see bad photos and relate to the camera, and I know that is wrong.

I guess I'll have just to try out. I'll look for another model of Olympus, like the OM-G you talked about. If I don't find or if the price is much higher, I'll go for Canon cause of the availability of lenses and equipament around (and the brand, why not). But the Olympus engineering and smaller body really attracts me. Well, just can't think too much or I probably will go crazy.

Ty for the comments, but more comments are really welcome since I haven't decide yet.

 

[Rick A]

I would buy any OM except the OM-10. I picked up two of them when they first came out, neither one lasted very long. They were bought to supplement my OM-1. You are definitly better off with an OM-G or OM-PC. I would spend my money on an OM -1 or 2 (OM-3 is definitly THE best manual 35mm) OM-2 or 2sp for auto cameras.

Rick

 

[Jeff Kubach]

Olympus is a great camera, you can't hardly beat it. From my personal experiesce I 'll with the Canon.

 

[jp498]

I used to use an OM10 and liked it a lot. It was a lot quieter and more compact than similar SLRs. It does not have a manual shutter speed dial, but it is very adjustable creatively. In addition to bulb or flash sync speeds, you can alter the normal aperature priority exposure to do what you want by adjusting the film speed dial. So if you want 1/30 and the meter says it's going to do 1/60, just turn the film speed dial a stop. It's got the exposure comp numbers right on it. The location seems like it has to be meant for that purpose. So it's basically aperature priority unless you override it. If you want something else beside that, get a single digit OM model.

I haven't had a Canon, so I can't offer a comparison for you.

 

[mgb74]

I really like the OM-1 and OM-2 (and have them both), but the OM-10 was not up to the quality and reliability of the other OM models (1, 2, etc). You can argue all day about the relative merits of Olympus and Canon lenses, but if in good condition you should be happy with either. So, between those 2 models, I'd go with the Canon.

 

[darinwc]

First off, I would recommend the OM2 over the OM10, or the OMG if you really want something inexpensive.
(The OM1 and OM2 is more reliable, the OMG has better usablity at the same price as the OM10)
Also, I would recommend the AE1 Program over the standard AE1. (The AE1 Program has a brighter viewscreen and better auto exposure.)

The OM series is only slightly smaller in size, but somehow feels much smaller in the hands. (both are metal and weighty)

If you like having a small kit, with only one or two lenses, either system will do.
If you plan to have a variety of lenses, I'd lean toward the Canon system.
If you want a quiet shutter (and a smoother feel to the advance) go for the Olympus.
If you like full auto exposure, go for the AE1p.
If you like manual exposure, get any of the above except the OM10.
If you like exposure compensation, get the OM2 or OMG.

I hope this helps!
Take a look at the online manuals.

 

[aoluain]

my 2 cents . . .

I would go with the OM- system over the Canon FD! purely
for the glass!

I have used the AE-1, AV-1, T70 and T90 in the past
and was really annoyed when the new EOS format came out
and couldnt use the FD glass . . . it is just a limited range
IMO.

the om mount lenses can be used on the eos bodies so are
more versatile that way, I think also the lenses are better
quality in general although there are some gems in the FD
range too. and they are so small!!

 

[Whiteymorange]

As a teacher, I had 6 new OM-10 cameras provided for my class by a kind parent. All broke within the first year (film transport/ winder problems). I have two AE-1 bodies now that have seen hundreds of times the use - no issues.

 

[Pumal]

The OM-10 has clear and known problems ( WE are not talking of an OM-1 or OM-2 here), so my election would be the AE-1 )or AE-1 Program)

 

[Andrei Machado]

Thanks everyone for the answers, you guys are helping a lot.

First off, I would recommend the OM2 over the OM10, or the OMG if you really want something inexpensive.
(The OM1 and OM2 is more reliable, the OMG has better usablity at the same price as the OM10)
Also, I would recommend the AE1 Program over the standard AE1. (The AE1 Program has a brighter viewscreen and better auto exposure.)

The OM series is only slightly smaller in size, but somehow feels much smaller in the hands. (both are metal and weighty)

If you like having a small kit, with only one or two lenses, either system will do.
If you plan to have a variety of lenses, I'd lean toward the Canon system.
If you want a quiet shutter (and a smoother feel to the advance) go for the Olympus.
If you like full auto exposure, go for the AE1p.
If you like manual exposure, get any of the above except the OM10.
If you like exposure compensation, get the OM2 or OMG.

I hope this helps!
Take a look at the online manuals.

Sure, helped me a lot, thank you very much! Too bad AE-1 doesn't have exposure compensation, I guess I would like that. But I like the auto exposure also.

my 2 cents . . .

I would go with the OM- system over the Canon FD! purely
for the glass!

I have used the AE-1, AV-1, T70 and T90 in the past
and was really annoyed when the new EOS format came out
and couldnt use the FD glass . . . it is just a limited range
IMO.

the om mount lenses can be used on the eos bodies so are
more versatile that way, I think also the lenses are better
quality in general although there are some gems in the FD
range too. and they are so small!!

When you say you would choose OM over Canon because of the glass, what influences the most in your opnion, the FD system that is incompatible with newer cameras or the quality of the lenses?

 

[aoluain]

I think what would swing it is the incompatibility or versatility to
use the lenses on different formats.

The Om glass is realitively inexpensive and while they might not be FAST
do produce great results.

I currently can use my Zuiko 21 f3.5, Zuiko 28 f3.5, Zuiko 100 f2.8,
Zuiko 135 3.5, Zuiko 200 f4, Nikkor-S 35 f2.8 and Nippon-Kogaku
50 f1.4 on my EOS bodies.

anyway I dont have either an OM or Nikon F mount body but if
and when I do decide I can use all those lenses on the bodies!

I couldnt use any of the FD lenses that way, the last FDn lens I sold
off was a beautiful 35-105 f3.5 [silvernose], would have really liked to use that on my EOS cameras . . .

anyway this may not be an issue for most FD shooters, just my thoughts!

 

[John Koehrer]

If you're looking for a manually controlled camera with an automatic option OM2 is more versatile than the Canon. The AE1/1P can be used manually but need to be taken down from the eye to set exposure. IE: there's no match needle or led visible through the finder in MANUAL.
OM2 has a match needle in manual, as is the OM1.

I have yet to meet a person who can identify what lens a picture was taken with without having been there when the picture was taken.

 

[Andrei Machado]

If you're looking for a manually controlled camera with an automatic option OM2 is more versatile than the Canon. The AE1/1P can be used manually but need to be taken down from the eye to set exposure. IE: there's no match needle or led visible through the finder in MANUAL.
OM2 has a match needle in manual, as is the OM1.

So even if I use it in shutter priority I can't take pictures with the Canon and change settings without taking the eyes of the viewfinder? And with the OM-2 that is possible, right?

I have yet to meet a person who can identify what lens a picture was taken with without having been there when the picture was taken.

Almost all photos from flickr has tags and comments about gear and equipament used.

Well, after these comments I guess the OM-2 is turning to be the best option. I'll try to find one for a good price and only get the Canon if I don't.

 

[Vonder]

I have, loaded with film right now, a Canon AE-1, an Olympus OM-10, and an Olympus OM2N. I have reasonably good glass for all of them, but if I had to grab one for a "you can't miss this!" photo, the only thing definite is the OM-10 would be the last choice. Why? It's shown a bit of flakey behavior in the past. Just enough to warrant a bit of caution. I have read that the electronics in the OM-10 tend to age poorly. I do not know if that is true.

I'd *probably* grab the OM2N if it had just been back from CLA - but that's another difficult proposition. There are a couple guys who do Canon gear but only one who does Olympus stuff - I don't mean the guys like Garry's or Midwest who claim they can work on anything - and he's backed up for months at last report.

So, I'd go with my recently CLA'd AE-1. It took about a week to get back. Both cameras are superb - the OM2N has TTL flash which the Canon doesn't, so the edge goes to Olympus on exposure.

 

[Allan Swindles]

Having been an OM user since it was first introduced I would be the first to recommend that system, however, I would favour the 1, 2, 3, 4 models rather than the 10, 20, 30 series. An OM-2N should be an ideal choice.

 

[mopar_guy]

Why not buy a Pro quality camera?

I see some form of which camera to buy posted over and over. Why not look for a pro quality camera instead of a amateur/consumer camera. The OM-2N was a quality camera with aperture preferred auto exposure while the OM-10 is a camera not intended for pro use. Canon AE-1 or AE-1 Program were not top of the line but a lot of Pros used them. Just my two cents worth.

 

[Tom Hicks]

Here are a few I took about 32 years ago of some of my projects (toy's)

AE-1, 50-1.4 , and some kind of Kodak 100 speed film . wasn't really into photography back then. Bought film where ever I could . Fox photo maybe.