Olympus OM-3

Ulrich Drolshagen

Subscriber
Joined
Mar 14, 2005
Messages
532
Location
Germany
Format
Medium Format
thuggins said:
You have to be careful in reading Maitani's interviews.
Click to expand...
Sorry, it's the only interview I know. But to me the explanation he gives for the location of the speed work an the dial on this particular camera seems to be conclusive.

Ulrich
 

flavio81

Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2014
Messages
5,073
Location
Lima, Peru
Format
Medium Format

Well, here mr. Maitani is ignoring camera history, or is lying, has memory problems, or simply did not take apart too many SLR cameras.

Both of the most famous cameras -- the Nikon F (1959) and the Pentax Spotmatic (1964), do have the shutter governor on the space beneath the mirror. In fact many cameras have the speed governor down there. And we're talking about cameras that came way before the OM-1.

So to say "there was no such camera" is either lying or showing ignorance.


Of course this means bigger size and aditional mechanisms.
Of course, cameras like the Spotmatic or the Nikon F could also have the shutter speed controlled by a ring around the lens mount.
But the reason the speed dial was put on top was ERGONOMICS, so both hands can control shutter speed and aperture at the same time. Just hold a Pentax Spotmatic.

So in short, Maitaini had compactness as the #1 virtue above anything else, and the OM-1 is an example of compactness in detriment of other qualities like ergonomics. And this is my main beef with the OM system.

The fun thing is that Maitani also designed one of my favorite cameras ever, the Olympus Pen S3.5.
 

Ulrich Drolshagen

Subscriber
Joined
Mar 14, 2005
Messages
532
Location
Germany
Format
Medium Format
flavio81 said:
But the reason the speed dial was put on top was ERGONOMICS, so both hands can control shutter speed and aperture at the same time. Just hold a Pentax Spotmatic.
Click to expand...

Admitted, I have not that much experience with conventional SLR. But every one I had my hands on, I needed thumb and index finger to adjust the speed (may be they just had been a little bit stiff in the controls?). After that I had to put back my finger onto the release button. To me the controls of the OMs seem to be much more intuitive. But may be it's just about what you got used to.

Ulrich
 

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
53,163
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format
Olympus OM's concentric aperture, focus and shutter speed controls are, IMHO, the best thing since sliced bread.

One hand can easily be used to adjust all three.

As usual, YMMV.
 

baachitraka

Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2011
Messages
3,561
Location
Bremen, Germany.
Format
Multi Format
I can't imagine controlling shutter and aperture simultaneously....
 

flavio81

Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2014
Messages
5,073
Location
Lima, Peru
Format
Medium Format
baachitraka said:
I can't imagine controlling shutter and aperture simultaneously....
Click to expand...

Well, for any manual match-needle camera like a Pentax Spotmatic or a Canon FTb or a Nikon F / F2, it helps to be able to move the shutter speed and aperture simultaneously. This allows you to easily "nail" the exposure.

I owned a Nikkormat camera, where the shutter speed is around the lens mount just like in the OM cameras. I did not like that feature, otherwise a good camera.

You know, when the Copal Square S shutter was released, the governor and timing gears on that shutter are close to where the self-timer is usually located (on classic cameras). This means the natural way of controlling speed was to put the shutter speed ring close to that mechanism. Cameras using this shutter are: Nikkormats, Canon EF, Ricoh Singlex TLS, among others. This is the famous "vertical" blade shutter.

- So on the Nikkormat the shutter speed ring is around the lens mount, which was, from a mechanics point of view, the most natural way to do it. And this also meant reduced manufacturing costs, which was a goal of the Nikkormat.

- On the Ricoh Singlex TL, the solution was to put the shutter speed dial on the front standard of the camera.

- On the Canon EF the solution was to use a system of pulleys and strings to be able to put the shutter speed dial on top, around the shutter button, exactly like as in the Leica M5 (the Canon copied the leica shutter button/speed dial). More complex, more expensive... All the trouble they took just to place the shutter speed dial where God intends it to be
Dead Link Removed
- On the Nikkormat EL, the shutter control is electronic so the shutter speed dial is back on top, as the Bible demands, and it is basically a potentiometer that controls the electronics which in turn control the shutter.

Nowadays all cameras have electronically controlled shutters; if placing the shutter speed ring around the lens mount was the best choice, every manufacturer would be doing it. But nobody does it nowadays, not even OLYMPUS.
 
Last edited:

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
53,163
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format
baachitraka said:
I can't imagine controlling shutter and aperture simultaneously....
Click to expand...
Not simultaneously, but interactively.

Adjust shutter speed to set exposure, check depth of field (which is also concentric), decide you need more or want less, adjust aperture accordingly, adjust shutter speed to give you correct exposure, etc.
 

Theo Sulphate

Member
Joined
Jul 3, 2014
Messages
6,489
Location
Gig Harbor
Format
Multi Format
As much as I like the Nikkormat and Olympus, I struggle with the shutter control near the lens mount.

The problem is that I need wider more distinct tactile properties between aperture, focus, and shutter speed rings. So for most lenses where you have a wide focus ring out towards the objective lens and a narrower more distinct aperture ring near the mount, that works for me.

I'll admit not being that fond of the Leica M lens' arrangement either. One other disappointment was my 28-85 Nikkor zoom, where the zoom control is a ring - I was always zooming instead of adjusting aperture. My 35-135 is a nice push/pull.

I suppose if the OM were my only camera, I'd get used to it.
 

Les Sarile

Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2010
Messages
3,425
Location
Santa Cruz, CA
Format
35mm
The genius that was Yoshihisa Maitani was to build a complete system slr around a smaller and lighter weight camera without sacrificing quality.



These are just a sampling from what I have of possibly some of what he may have been referring to as the larger cameras for comparison. I have also added the weights of each example. Clearly, he achieved the goal.
 

Theo Sulphate

Member
Joined
Jul 3, 2014
Messages
6,489
Location
Gig Harbor
Format
Multi Format
Good comparison.

Unless one was alive and interested in SLRs back in the early 1970's, it's hard to describe what a sensation the OM-1 was when it first appeared.

To me, it had an aura of elegant precision.
 

Les Sarile

Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2010
Messages
3,425
Location
Santa Cruz, CA
Format
35mm
Theo Sulphate said:
Good comparison.

Unless one was alive and interested in SLRs back in the early 1970's, it's hard to describe what a sensation the OM-1 was when it first appeared.

To me, it had an aura of elegant precision.
Click to expand...

What I can't show in the comparison is that for the smallest SLR, it also had the biggest and brightest viewfinder at that time. But of course if you wear glasses - and possibly need more eye relief, this may not be a benefit.
 
Last edited:

E. von Hoegh

Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2011
Messages
6,197
Location
Adirondacks
Format
Multi Format
I
CMoore said:
Any of you guys own an OM-3.?
Good Heavens, they are worth their weight.
I keep hoping to find one, at a garage sale, in its box, almost unused, for 15 dollars.
I have never even seen one, other than a picture in a magazine.
Click to expand...
I have one, as new, box, papers, gaurantee stamped in Jeddah KSA -"Shamsan Store". Also 35mm PC, 28mm/2.8, 50/1.4, 135/2.8, 200/4. It needs refoaming, but is otherwise perfect. I have all of the packing and papers for the lenses too.

Edit - I've never put film in it, and no it is not for sale.
 
Last edited:
OP
OP

CMoore

Subscriber
Joined
Aug 23, 2015
Messages
6,222
Location
USA CA
Format
35mm
Why have you not used it....because of the Seals/Foam.?
 

E. von Hoegh

Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2011
Messages
6,197
Location
Adirondacks
Format
Multi Format
CMoore said:
Why have you not used it....because of the Seals/Foam.?
Click to expand...
It was my father's, I've no clue why he didn't use it. Probably the OM4 was more convenient. I looked it over yesterday, and will get a seal kit for it. I found it after he died in 2008, I don't think he ever took it out of the box. Kind of a time capsule from the mid '80s.
 

Chan Tran

Subscriber
Joined
May 10, 2006
Messages
6,833
Location
Sachse, TX
Format
35mm
Olympus introduced the OM-3 and OM-4 at the same time with the price of the OM-3 slightly less. Fewer OM-3 were sold than OM-4 so Olympus decided to increase its price above that of the OM-4.
 

Chan Tran

Subscriber
Joined
May 10, 2006
Messages
6,833
Location
Sachse, TX
Format
35mm
Olympus introduced the OM-3 and OM-4 at the same time with the price of the OM-3 slightly less. Fewer OM-3 were sold than OM-4 so Olympus decided to increase its price above that of the OM-4.
 

wiltw

Subscriber
Joined
Oct 4, 2008
Messages
6,455
Location
SF Bay area
Format
Multi Format
Someone looked up dealer prices and found OM4 and OM3 always sold to the dealers at the same price, and both had the same suggested retail price. For August 1985, the MSRP was US$ 600. When the OM4T (the US designation) came out in 08/86, MSRP was US$770,
 

Rick A

Subscriber
Joined
Mar 31, 2009
Messages
9,947
Location
Laurel Highlands
Format
8x10 Format
I feel I should relate this to you Bill. When I was at the camera shop intending to buy an OM-3, the owner of the store handed me an OM-4, and explained it was far superior to the 3 as it had "auto exposure with spot metering". I had never owned a camera with auto any danged thing before, and bit. He sold me the OM-4 that you now own, Had I not listened to him and stuck to my intentions, you might now be the owner of an OM-3.
 

Chan Tran

Subscriber
Joined
May 10, 2006
Messages
6,833
Location
Sachse, TX
Format
35mm

A quote from the Nikon website:
"
The Nikon FM adopted a square-type focal plane shutter called "Copal CCS-M". This shutter unit features in that shutter speed selector cam shaft is arranged horizontally, and if coupled directly with the shutter dial, the dial goes through the camera's front panel.
This was same as in the previous "Copal Square S" shutter unit and other manufacturers actually located the shutter dial in front of the camera body.
The Nikomat series, starting with the Nikomat FT (See Part 5.), brought the dial to the lens mount area for the sake of looks, but there were arguments for and against this.

When adjusting exposure by looking through the viewfinder, the aperture ring and shutter dial are close to each other, for easy operation.
Once you get used to it, you can find out the shutter speed setting from the position of this dial's lever.
However, on the other hand, some criticized its relatively unsophisticated lens-shutter-camera-type looks.

Many people had an idée fixe that a shutter dial of a focal plane shutter should be located on top of the camera.
As a result, the FM's shutter dial was placed at the conventional position, as on the Nikomat EL, ELW, and Nikon EL2.

This arrangement requires rotating movement from the camera top's dial to the shutter unit's front cam shaft, and bending 90 degrees of the rotating direction.

The designers considered using gears, but too many gears would be needed, and the plays will not be completely eliminated. One day, an engineer suggested using a durable string. Despite skepticism, it worked just fine, without shifting or loosening, even after hard testing.

Thus, we succeded to position the shutter dial conventionally in a very simple way using a string a pulley."

http://imaging.nikon.com/history/chronicle/cousins09-e/index.htm
 

faberryman

Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2016
Messages
6,048
Location
Wherever
Format
Multi Format
You often hear complaints about the location on the shutter speed ring on single digit OM cameras; you never hear those complaints with a Hasselblad yet it is in the same location - concentric with the aperture. I like the location. I can adjust shutter speed, aperture, and focus with my left hand without taking my right hand off the shutter release, and without moving my eye from the viewfinder. But everybody has his own preference as to camera haptics so I don't begrudge those that prefer the shutter speed on the top plate. I think it is largely what you are use to. I have been using my Olympus cameras for nearly 40 years, so I would have a hard time switching back at this point.
 
Last edited:

nsurit

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 27, 2005
Messages
1,808
Location
Texas Hill Country
Format
Multi Format
The OM 3T or Ti is the much harder one to find, which is not to say the OM 3 is not hard to find or a fine camera. If someone is seriously interested in an OM 3, contact me off list at nsurit@aol.com. I own both the 3 and 3 Ti and am not interested in selling either, however have a friend who will be back in the USA mid-August who has one he would probably let go of but not for $15. Bill Barber
 

Chan Tran

Subscriber
Joined
May 10, 2006
Messages
6,833
Location
Sachse, TX
Format
35mm

August 1985 issue of Popular Photography in the Adorama ads listed the OM-3 for $349.95 and the OM-4 for $286.95.
 

benjiboy

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 18, 2005
Messages
11,972
Location
U.K.
Format
35mm
I used to sell the OM3 in the professional dealers I worked at in the the days they were current and it is a fine camera but in today's market for the same money one would have to shell out for one you could buy two mint condition Canon New F1's with AE prisms and I know which I would choose.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…