Olympus Om System - How are they holding up

[Bill Burk]

I meant to ask The Forum....... from the website "the electronics has been improved to reduce the battery drain that was clearly too high in the OM-3"
Was the battery just hit hard during metering, or was it a situation where the battery was drained whenever it was in camera.?
Thank You

The battery drain in OM-3 would probably be same as it was in older OM-4 circuits. Drives me nuts in the OM-4. In the OM-3 I would feel confident going out that I would not miss shots for not having battery. With the OM-4 you only have 60 and B without battery. Not enough to make it through the day. As a result I always carry 6 batteries, and it's always been enough. But I often miss shots.

Have had my eye on OM-3 for a long time, and it's supposed to have higher build quality than OM-1, but the OM-1 has kept shooting reliably...

 

[CMoore]

The battery drain in OM-3 would probably be same as it was in older OM-4 circuits. Drives me nuts in the OM-4. In the OM-3 I would feel confident going out that I would not miss shots for not having battery. With the OM-4 you only have 60 and B without battery. Not enough to make it through the day. As a result I always carry 6 batteries, and it's always been enough. But I often miss shots.

Have had my eye on OM-3 for a long time, and it's supposed to have higher build quality than OM-1, but the OM-1 has kept shooting reliably...

Wow..... it is that bad huh.?
I have not yet shot a roll with my OM-3. When i do, i guess i will make sure i am prepared.
The OM-4....it is worse, why....does it use an electronic shutter or something like that.?
Thank You

 

[Bill Burk]

CMoore,

Yes. The OM-4 is totally battery-dependent for all speeds except there are B and 60 manual setting that you can pick if you know the battery is out. It is an older OM-4 circuit that was problematic and I have two of them. They fixed the circuit issue in newer OM-4 (and all the ti series) so they are less likely to suffer from the battery drain. I had sent my original OM-4 to Olympus twice to get it fixed and both times they sent me a card with my battery taped to it saying the problem was mine, the battery was dead. The card explained I must have had an electronic flash attached, in that scenario the LED flash ready indicator would drain the battery.

Later they got the internal memo that there was a circuit issue but I learned to carry 6 batteries and always check before shooting.

But since the OM-4 depends on the battery I often miss the first shot of the day.

You can tell if you have the old or new circuit board by selecting battery test. Old circuit will stay lit and keep beeping. New circuit will stop after a period of time.

It really shouldn't be a big deal for OM-3 because you don't have self-timer (that blinking red light that tells you the shutter is about to go off is also a big drain). And if the battery dies while you are taking the meter reading all you have to do is shoot at what you think is right and it's going to be fine.

I would want the OM-3 for its better build quality. Otherwise, an OM-1 is also fully mechanical and a good choice.

Interestingly, I switched from Pentax screw mount to Olympus and lately realize that the OM-1 and any OM lens has all the features of the best of the Pentax screw mount series, Spotmatic-F with SMCT lenses. ES-II is a little like the OM-4 except you get to have shutter speeds 60, 125, 250, 500 and 1000 - a lot more flexible than the OM-4 when battery dies, it's not quite a doorstop. But hoo boy. The Canon A-1 is a doorstop with a dead battery.

 

[CMoore]

Great Info..... Thank You

 

[Smaug01]

I have my grandpa's OM1N from about 1979. Still holding up great, though it has gotten exercise at least every other month.

The foam seals need replacing; other than that, it is perfect.

I had an OM4. It was a great camera while I had it.

I had an OMG, it's second shutter curtain was visible in every frame. I gave that one away.

I have an OM10 now. Nice little camera; electronics are good, but there's no provision for AE lock or exposure compensation other than lying to the film speed setting. Really clumsy implementation of a manual mode, too.

For the lenses, you have to watch the apertures. They tend to get slow. I have two 50/1.8s that are slow. I either have to take them apart and clean them or just dedicate them for shooting digital with adapters. (where the lens meters stopped-down)

The less common lenses are quite expensive second-hand, if they're without issue. 50/1.8, 28/3.5 and 135/3.5 are common. I picked up a 300/4.5 to adapt and use with my OM-D as a 600/4.5. Haven't done it yet, but had to pay top dollar for a good one from Japan.

A lot of the lenses are not multi-coated, so plan on using a hood to get the most out of their outstanding Zuiko optics.

 

[Dennis S]

A "gift " to me from me Dec 2018. Batteries have been in for a full 13 mnths. Glad it was NOT one of those with the drain problem. Also have an OM 1 & OM 10

 

[Quendil]

I have an OM4ti which is my main camera and have not had any issues with battery drain. I think they were supposed to have updated the electronics in that version. After shooting I do put it in manual mode and turn the speed to B which switches off the metering so not sure if that helps.

 

[johnha]

I have an OM1 which has a broken meter, bought to compare against my MX (MX feels more refined). I was going to buy an OM10 as this was one of the bodies I was looking at for my first SLR in the '80s (ended up with a K mount ME Super clone) but the OM1 was cheaper.

 

[Smaug01]

I have an OM1 which has a broken meter, bought to compare against my MX (MX feels more refined).

It ought to, as the OM1 came out 5 years sooner. Pentax's small bodies are a direct response to the revolutionary OM1.

I was going to buy an OM10 as this was one of the bodies I was looking at for my first SLR in the '80s (ended up with a K mount ME Super clone) but the OM1 was cheaper.

You made the right choice, but maybe for the wrong reason, hehehe.

 

[Helge]

I have a general feeling that OM cameras are slightly less reliable than the other main brands.
I have had problems with the meter in most of them, and there is the infamous foam issue where the foam padding around the prism will deteriorate and creep over the edges and sometimes tarnish the silver coating.
This is the case way longer into the series than it should have been.

Other than that, the lenses while very nice feeling, also seem flimsy to me.
As in the mechanics inside not being as durable as other brands.
Stop down springs being lose or broken and the grease around the helicoil being unusually stiff, are more concrete examples.
The lens optics while good are perhaps generally the least good among the main five Japanese brands.
The wides are famous, but the Minolta 24 2.8 and AiS 28 2.8 are better for example AFAICS.
The rest of the lineup is good but not stellar.
The Plain Jane 50mm 1.8/7 or 1.4s also seems to be the “worst” among the peers.

 

[Smaug01]

I have a general feeling that OM cameras are slightly less reliable than the other main brands.
I have had problems with the meter in most of them, and there is the infamous foam issue where the foam padding around the prism will deteriorate and creep over the edges and sometimes tarnish the silver coating.
This is the case way longer into the series than it should have been.

Other than that, the lenses while very nice feeling, also seem flimsy to me.
As in the mechanics inside not being as durable as other brands.
Stop down springs being lose or broken and the grease around the helicoil being unusually stiff, are more concrete examples.
The lens optics while good are perhaps generally the least good among the main five Japanese brands.
The wides are famous, but the Minolta 24 2.8 and AiS 28 2.8 are better for example AFAICS.
The rest of the lineup is good but not stellar.
The Plain Jane 50mm 1.8/7 or 1.4s also seems to be the “worst” among the peers.

That would be hard to tell without side-by-side examples. I guess to be fair, they would have to be made with something like an adapted Sony α7r. My impressions is that all the Big 5 prime lenses are stellar and it would be hard to tell them apart without pixel-peeping.

 

[M-88]

I have a general feeling that OM cameras are slightly less reliable than the other main brands.
I have had problems with the meter in most of them, and there is the infamous foam issue where the foam padding around the prism will deteriorate and creep over the edges and sometimes tarnish the silver coating.
This is the case way longer into the series than it should have been.

Never had any of the above mentioned problems with "n" versions of OM-1 and OM-2. Not to mention OM-2S and OM-4. Theoretically (and apparently - in practice as well), "n" versions contain all the improvements that have been made to OM-1/2 throughout the years of production. So when buying those two models, it is always a good idea to go for "n" and disregard the older ones.

 

[Helge]

Never had any of the above mentioned problems with "n" versions of OM-1 and OM-2. Not to mention OM-2S and OM-4. Theoretically (and apparently - in practice as well), "n" versions contain all the improvements that have been made to OM-1/2 throughout the years of production. So when buying those two models, it is always a good idea to go for "n" and disregard the older ones.

You might have a point. That could be why the market seems almost vacuum cleaned of 1n and 2n, while the plain 1 and 2 bodies are easy to find for little money.
The OM-10 is however a PoS, judging by the copies I’ve tried, even if the concept is nice.
The light meter is always off by several stops, the touch sensor is erratic, the on/off button gets worn out, like there is no tomorrow, and the advance arm sounds like there is a ball bearing loose in there someplace, every time you use it.
Then there is the obvious money grab with the manual adapter. I have one and that is a PoS too.

 

[Frank53]

I have a general feeling that OM cameras are slightly less reliable than the other main brands.
I have had problems with the meter in most of them, and there is the infamous foam issue where the foam padding around the prism will deteriorate and creep over the edges and sometimes tarnish the silver coating.
This is the case way longer into the series than it should have been.

Other than that, the lenses while very nice feeling, also seem flimsy to me.
As in the mechanics inside not being as durable as other brands.
Stop down springs being lose or broken and the grease around the helicoil being unusually stiff, are more concrete examples.
The lens optics while good are perhaps generally the least good among the main five Japanese brands.
The wides are famous, but the Minolta 24 2.8 and AiS 28 2.8 are better for example AFAICS.
The rest of the lineup is good but not stellar.
The Plain Jane 50mm 1.8/7 or 1.4s also seems to be the “worst” among the peers.

I’ve owned and used OM. camera’s since 1974. At the moment I have around 10 camera’s and some 15 lenses and I don’t recognize them in your story. There was a problem with the foam around the prism in the OM-1, but not in the models after that and it could easily be fixed. My 1974 OM-1 has travelled the world with me, I’m not a very careful user, it looks very used, but it works like new after 46 years, including the lightmeter. Of course it had a few cla’s over the years.
Concerning the lenses, I’ve owned dozens of them over the years and never needed to have one of them serviced.
About lens quality, I never had any reason to complain. In the 70’s and 80’s photo magazines used to publish extensive tests of lenses, also comparing different brands and the usual conclusion on the Zuiko’s was, that there were lenses on the market, that were just as good, but never significantly better.
Regards,
Frank

 

[M-88]

The OM-10 is however a PoS, judging by the copies I’ve tried, even if the concept is nice.
The light meter is always off by several stops, the touch sensor is erratic, the on/off button gets worn out, like there is no tomorrow, and the advance arm sounds like there is a ball bearing loose in there someplace, every time you use it.
Then there is the obvious money grab with the manual adapter. I have one and that is a PoS too.

Couldn't have put it better myself had three OM10-s and none of them had a working touch sensor. And to make the matters worse, advance/cocking mechanism has plastic parts, unlike metal in single digit OM bodies. Encountered one OM10 with broken parts inside. Generally a double digit OM are cheap. OM20/OMG is same OM10 with all its problems, the only improvement being that it has integrated manual shutter speed selector. Rather flimsy, by the way and with poor feedback. Never had OM30 so don't know much. As for the last one - OM40/OMPC, it's better than its predecessors, BUT it's got that unbearable stench of the eighties which manifests in uninspiring body, a lot of black plastic and rubber instead of leatherette, that doesn't hold well against aging.

 

[MattKing]

I sold OM's back in the day when the OM-10 and OM-2 were "new".
The two digit OMs are much lighter, and clearly designed for lighter duty use.
But they are quite old now.
My OM-Gs/OM-20s reflect a lot of improvements over the OM-10, including the best implementation of a self-timer in the entire line. John Hermanson (Camtech) has said in the past that the OM-20 incorporated all the improvements that Olympus and the repair industry had identified as being needed for the OM-10.
But again, they are quite old now.
In my case, I'm down to four OM bodies now - OM-G, OM-2s, OM-2n and OM-4T. In the past I have had as well an OM-1 (non-MD), an OM-1n, an OM-2 and a second OM-G, but they were either sold, traded or given as gifts.

 

[btaylor]

The budget models were just that, designed to compete in a lower cost realm and cheapened for that purpose. The single digit OMs are solid, still. I love the way they handle once you get used to the shutter speed dial. As pointed out above the optics stood up well to all the top Japanese glass of the era.

 

[CMoore]

I sold OM's back in the day when the OM-10 and OM-2 were "new".
The two digit OMs are much lighter, and clearly designed for lighter duty use.
But they are quite old now.
My OM-Gs/OM-20s reflect a lot of improvements over the OM-10, including the best implementation of a self-timer in the entire line. John Hermanson (Camtech) has said in the past that the OM-20 incorporated all the improvements that Olympus and the repair industry had identified as being needed for the OM-10.
But again, they are quite old now.
In my case, I'm down to four OM bodies now - OM-G, OM-2s, OM-2n and OM-4T. In the past I have had as well an OM-1 (non-MD), an OM-1n, an OM-2 and a second OM-G, but they were either sold, traded or given as gifts.

Just curious.
Did you prefer the extra features offered by the 2 and 4..... is that why you eventually sold the 1n models.?
Thank You

 

[John51]

Could an OM power winder could be modded to use as a battery pack?

Extra weight but it should get a battery hungry camera through the day.

 

[M-88]

Could an OM power winder could be modded to use as a battery pack?

Extra weight but it should get a battery hungry camera through the day.

Not so sure about that, but anything can be manufatured. It's just a matter of resources. Rick Oleson had this kind of conversion, for example:

http://rick_oleson.tripod.com/index-100.html

While it doesn't look sexy, it's certainly much lighter than any of OM winders.

Edit: Surely with the right tools and a couple of winders to butcher, one can make something similar so that power jack comes out from winder and is inserted into the battery compartment of OM body. But from what I've heard, even the hungriest of OM can work for reasonably long time with silver oxide cells.

 

[MattKing]

Just curious.
Did you prefer the extra features offered by the 2 and 4..... is that why you eventually sold the 1n models.?
Thank You

I started out with an OM-1 (no n or even an MD) back in the 1970s and used that for many years. In the 1980s, I traded it in toward the purchase of an OM-2s because of the spot metering, OTF metering (including with flash), automatic exposure option and built in flash shoe. That became my main camera, and I continue to use it.
The rest I picked up when prices plummeted.
I have lots of other manual exposure cameras, with and without meters, so I didn't feel the need to spend a long time with the OM-1n I bought used and a couple of years later re-sold.

 

[CMoore]

That Makes Sense..... Thank You

 

[Bill Burk]

In fairness I must report...

My much maligned OM-4 made it through 2 rolls this weekend with the batteries that were in it... I even tempted fate and used the self-timer twice. The self-timer often is the “straw that breaks the camel’s back” so I was surprised to make it without changing.

I went back to cable-release for the majority.

 

[Smaug01]

My experiences:

OM1N - was my grandpa's. Never been serviced, only exercised to keep everything limber. Not shot much these past 10 years. Still works great. Needs a mirror damper and light seals, is all. The second hot shoe is cracked but functional, despite my bring careful and not mounting big flashguns. It appears to be made of phenolic, which is hard and brittle. Today, I would call this a poor choice of plastic (it's technically a thermoset, not a thermoplastic; Very resistant to temperatures, but not elastic at all. Same as Bakelite)

OM-G / OM20 - Thrift store camera. The second curtain of the shutter hung up and was visible in every pic. I gave it away. I just loved the name OMG and as someone else said, I liked its implementation all-around.

OM10 - Another thrift store camera. This one works fine. The manual adapter is rather cheezy, but their target customer would not be shooting manually anyhow. I don't mind the plastic advance lever. It's a shorter and lighter throw than that of my OM1N. No problem there. Everything works fine.

OM4 - Had one in the 90s; great camera. This is the evolution of the OM2S Program. No problems. OM2 and OM2 Program had reputations as battery-eaters.

OM2N - I'd like to get a nice one of these, some day; they seem to have just the right feature set and implementation. However, as I have a Nikon FE2 and FG with more lenses, it's hard to justify.

 

[Smaug01]

I just visited a guy named Charles who works at Central Camera in Chicago. He had just gotten a ultrawide Zuiko lens. He brought out his bag, which contained an OM4Ti and an OM2N, along with a sweet array of user lenses. Sweet ones too, not the ones you see all the time on ebay for under $100. Mostly snappy apertures. Some had fungus, which didn't bother him. He also said OM lenses are not hard to take apart and clean. (which I'm not sure if I believe, or he wouldn't have any with fungus in them, hehehe)