Olympus OM1N vs OM2N vs Nikon FM2N

Hi there,

I'm looking to get my first 35mm SLR, but just need some guidance on what to invest in. I want something durable, that can work without necessarily having batteries installed in it.

I was thinking about the OM1, but it seems kinda old and I've heard some folk be like, oh the lenses etc are becoming like collectors item prices, the OM2 seems kinda newer so might not have such a drawback?

I'd like the Nikon, but price is raised here, and I've seen some scepticism in how it compares to the OMs on the forum...

I'm basically changing my mind every day on what I'd like, and would appreciate some better advice than that impulse buying voice in the back of my head

Thanks

Hello. OM2 would need batteries present to offer anything other than a 1/60th. OM1 is still cheap, really. The problem about lens cost that you refer to is largely driven now by them being flavour of the month for digital camera users, and would largely apply of you were to be looking for wider angle lenses which would be "standard" on many digital SLRs. However, if you want "just" a 50mm lens the f1.8 lens offered as standard with almost all OM SLRs is amonsgt the best lenses one could ever wish for. Or, buy an OM1 body and then look out for an OM10 with lens, which often sell for less than the lens on its own! Don't ask me why, just how it is.
The Nikon? Can't help. I've not picked up any real superirity of Zuikos v Nikkors, but others may have. Of ocurse an OM in an ER case can be with you all the time becaue it is small. An FM2 is bigger.
Good to get going with something, though!
Jim.

Also worth looking at Pentax - the MX or ME Super would probably fill your needs, similar size to an OM. The MX is manual and only needs batteries for the light meter, it's also pretty highly specified for its day with both aperture and shutter speed displayed in the viewfinder. The ME Super needs batteries to offer anything other than 1/125 and B but it does have aperture priority auto and manual modes. I would say the MX would suit you best as it's built like a tank and very configurable - you can change focussing screens, add a winder and databack if you want to.

If you want something to carry around unobtrusively then a black MX or ME Super with the 40mm "pancake" lens is ideal. Plus you can use any K mount lens you can lay hands on aside from the FA J and the latest DA ones which lack aperture rings.

Lenses to look for: The Pentax-M 50mm f1.7 was a standard kit lens on these two, it's superbly sharp and compact but not quite as small as the 40mm. The Pentax-M 28mm f3.5 (better than the f2.8) and Pentax-M 135mm f3.5 would complete a classic three prime kit with very nice glass.

OM1 requires now discontinues 1.35v mercury batteries for light meter. You can hack it to use 1.5v alkaline. OM2 req batteries (1.5v) as mentioned.
Nikon FM2n uses alkaline batteries for light meter. There are more Nikkor lenses to choose from then Olies.
I have them all but I use my Nikon more.

I have a pair of OM-1n's, and buy the Wein cell batteries for them. I could run them without, but I get abuot 2+ years on a cell, so its cheaper than other batteries. Contrary to popular belief, Zuiko glass isn't "collector", tho some have retained a high price since manufacture, mainstream lenses are still cheap. Aftermarket(third party) glass is even cheaper, tho I dont think you will see noticable differences unless you shoot test targets, some people(elitists) shun them. Size and weight wise, the OM-1 bodies are small and light, start adding long lenses and they get just as heavy as any other brand. I prefer the ergonomics of the OM's, no need to remove your hand to change shutter settings, as its on the lens mounting plate on the front of the body, not on the top like everyone elses.

If you really want to go top of the line, invest in an OM-3t, it'll set you back a bundle, but worth every penny for the light metering system, and takes modern batteries. Its fully mechanical and only uses batteries for the meter.

Sheebay said:

Hi there,

I'm looking to get my first 35mm SLR, but just need some guidance on what to invest in. I want something durable, that can work without necessarily having batteries installed in it.

I was thinking about the OM1, but it seems kinda old and I've heard some folk be like, oh the lenses etc are becoming like collectors item prices, the OM2 seems kinda newer so might not have such a drawback?

I'd like the Nikon, but price is raised here, and I've seen some scepticism in how it compares to the OMs on the forum...

I'm basically changing my mind every day on what I'd like, and would appreciate some better advice than that impulse buying voice in the back of my head

Thanks

Click to expand...

Nikon. Far more dependable.

I had an OM1 /OM2 system when they were new. Wonderful lenses, but the OM2n cameras had gremlins. Batteries would fail suddenly and repeatedly. I got so mad that I tossed a OM2n in the Mississippi River.

I've always wanted an OM1, even back when they were new. Now the lenses are hard to get and relatively expensive. My FM2n is a nice, lightweight camera that's about the same size. And it has a great system behind it. Lenses, accessories, flashes are abundantly available on the used market. I've never had an issue with any of them. I think you can't go wrong with the Nikon system, and it will be easier to get into than Olympus.

-Laura

Every one you mentioned is great. If you are worried about an OM1 being old, just get it serviced by John Hermanson at Camtech and it will be as good as new and he'll convert it to modern batteries.

I have 2 Pentax ME Supers and they are very durable. They need batteries, but the batteries last like, a significant portion of a human lifespan, so it's pretty bearable. I THINK that you can still use at least 1 shutter speed when the batteries die, but to be honest I haven't ever had the batteries die.

I have an OM2n, and it's wonderful, but as mentioned it needs batteries to operate AT ALL...you DON'T even get to use 1/60th with dead batteries; the camera is a brick without them. And unlike my Pentaxen, the batteries don't last for years/decades, more like a few months at most. Cold weather really takes them out quick too. Still, it's a great camera for active shooting especially strapped to its motordrive.

I have an OM1 and an OM1N and I use them most of the time because the battery issue is just not there. I have never bothered to convert them to silver oxide because I just don't put batteries in them, and then I don't have to look at that annoying needle in the viewfinder either.

Lenses for the OM2 and OM1 are the same so there is no price difference.

I think this whole price of an item and availability issue is driven by whats "in" at amy time. When prices on Nikons is low, they become the "hot ticket item", until the prices reflect that, and the price of other cameras drop because they aren't being bought. Subsequently, when the price of another brand is low, that one becomes the "hot ticket item" and the run on them drives up price, and it starts all over again.

Do your homework, shop diligently, and set a maximum price for what you want, then be patient and buy the camera you want. Try to find someone that has what you are looking for, and see if they will let you check out theirs to see if it is what you want. Shopping the net without any hands on demos is frustrating, and sometimes you think you know something is what you want, until you've bought it, and you dont like it. You cannot buy something based on other peoples opinions, you must do the work required to form your own.

Sheebay said:

I'd like the Nikon, but price is raised here

Click to expand...

Tell us where you live and someone may have some tips.

All 3 are good choices. Early OMs can have a problem with deteriorating light seals damaging the prism, so research that. Both OM and Nikon glass is plenty "good enough" - unless your requirements are super critical it's a wash. (And if they are super critical, you probably need to make a decision on a specific lens basis.) Nikon lenses seem generally easier to find and, I think, a bit less expensive in the wide and tele lengths.

Personally, I don't find the battery issue of the OM2 that big a deal. Quality silver oxide batteries last quite long and it's just not that big a deal to carry spares. Just my opinion.

I have both but I lean toward the OM. I would suggest the OMs if you really value their compact size and the Nikon if size isn't that big an issue.

Buy what you like... none of it is junk.
Have you heard about the Alpa? Don't go there.

Thanks all for the advice, the widely varying opinions are implying that it's really just personal choice (though obviously the OM1ns are pretty popular). I'll keep my options open

On another note, does anyone have advice on any books on 35mm shooting that are of particular use?

Thanks again.

P.S. I live in Scotland (Glasgow/Edinburgh)

Hmm, some good and some not quite so good advice so far. I use both Om1n and Om2 as my main shooters. B&W in one (OM1) and colour in t'other. My advice:-

Go for the "n" versions of both - later/improved and virtually no difference in price.

As people have said the Om2 needs batteries, but these are cheap and readily available. The OM1 doesn't (except for the non-coupled meter) , but really needs converting to take silver (SR44) batteries.

Both take the same lenses, and the common ones are dirt cheap and excellent. Don't overlook the zooms - 35-70 (F4 and F3.5-4.5) and 70-150. Cheap and perfectly useable. Both better than the kit canon autofocus plastic lenses lenses I have.

Do watch out for prism foam degrading and stripping the viewfinder prism silvering. (on ALL Om 1/2s, not just early ones) Shows up as blemishes along the bottom of the viewfinder. Not really particularly serious as the foam can be removed, and damaged prisms are available as common to the cheaper OM10.

Do budget for a CLA - it should ensure years of reliable use, and you will get new seals and foams, and probably on an OM1 a battery conversion. Don't know where you are but here in the UK this costs £50-£60 from the specialist I use.

Do consider the pentaxes if you find a good one. I have no experience of using these, but they seem to be similar quality/price. Nikons seem to be more expensive all round.

I wouldn't bother with the OM3/4/T unless you have deep pockets. The best bang for the bucks is definitely in the OM1/2s

If you are in the UK check out ffordes.co.uk as they usually have OMs in (and pentax/nikon) and their prices are barely any different to fleabay, and you at least get a 3 month warranty. I am not sure they test everything, but they will quickly change a dud (or they did me when I got a dud flash)

There are easily accessible and reasonably affordable adapters available that permit use of current batteries in the OM1. Don't try to use the alkaline replacements though - they will never give consistent readings.

As for the reliability of the OM2 - there is some sample variation, and a couple of models (OM2s and OM4) that use batteries more quickly than others, but generally they have good reliability histories.

When I was haunting eBay to find OM stuff, I used to see a lot of stuff from UK sellers. I don't know whether that has changed.

I've just recently sold my last OM1 body, but still retain 4 other bodies. The SR44 batteries are cheap and plentiful on the internet.

As to lens availability, it does seem that the adaptability to digital bodies has affected that. Currently I am happy with the 9 or so I have .

I'm not sure if they're available for the Olympus, but there are a few sellers offering replacement light seal kits for Pentax SLRs which include the mirror bumper foam (the bit in front of the focusing screen which breaks up and turns into horrible sticky goo over the years). I'd be amazed if they don't also make them for the OM series given their popularity.

I've replaced the seals on about ten cameras now and never had any trouble, just follow the instructions and work carefully. I didn't have any trouble with light leaks but decided I'd rather avoid ending up with the sticky goo in the mechanism.

Unless you already have Olympus gear I would strongly suggest at least handling a Pentax MX or ME Super, both are great cameras and fit your requirements. The MX is probably more robust, but providing you get a good ME Super they'll keep clicking for years. I picked up a very tidy chrome one for £28 with 50mm f1.7 lens, then a similar black one with a Tokina AT-X 28-85mm for about the same (now replaced with 40mm f2.8).

I used both extensively last year so I can give some pointers:

MX - all manual, all mechanical. Controls are light and precise, shutter speed and aperture are displayed by clever optical/mechanical trickery (a dial coupled to the shutter speed control and a little periscope-type window which shows the aperture on the lens in the top of the viewfinder). Has self timer and DOF preview, shutter speeds run 1/1000 to 1 second with B for long exposures via cable release. Flash sync is 1/60 with choice of hotshoe or PC sockets.

ME Super - electronic, has aperture priority auto, manual, 1/125, B and Lock positions on control dial. Speeds with batteries in range from 1/2000 to 8s, although the auto setting can make longer exposures in low light if it decides they're needed (I've had it produce ~30s exposures at night with street lighting). Without batteries you're stuck with 1/125 and B. Flash sync is 1/125 with choice of hotshoe or PC socket, if you use a dedicated Pentax flash it will switch to this speed automatically and display an indicator in the viewfinder when flash is charged. Shutter speed is only visible in viewfinder whether in auto or manual modes. Includes self timer and exposure compensation.

Both will take any K mount lens with an aperture ring and can easily be fitted with a motor winder if needed, data backs are also available and in the case of the MX focussing screens can be changed. Build quality is superb - my MX looks like it had a previous life fighting grizzly bears but still works perfectly.

As to lens availability, it does seem that the adaptability to digital bodies has affected that

Click to expand...

Seems to me that all that has really changed is lots more silly priced "buy it now". The completed listings still show common lenses going for £10-£30

OK I've actually now purchased a nikon fm2n body, so please no stories involving the glory of olympus oms...

All that I wonder now is which lens I should get a hold of. I'm presuming that to get a standard 50mm f1.8 is a good idea?

Also Ii'm putting these questions all into the same thread - that ok or would you prefer me to put further questions in appropriated threads?

The lens is up to you, depending on what you do. For street a 35mm at f/8 or f/11. For portraits; 85mm f/1.8., etc

Sheebay said:

OK I've actually now purchased a nikon fm2n body, so please no stories involving the glory of olympus oms...

All that I wonder now is which lens I should get a hold of. I'm presuming that to get a standard 50mm f1.8 is a good idea?

Also Ii'm putting these questions all into the same thread - that ok or would you prefer me to put further questions in appropriated threads?

Click to expand...

The standard 50mm f1.8 is a fine lens and a really good value. If you want longer, I would recommend the wonderful 105mm f2.5. Or if you'd prefer an 85mm, either the wonderful f1.4 or the excellent f1.8.

The Nikon manual focus 28mm and 24mm lenses all seem fine. I use the 28mm f2 because I need the speed for indoor shots. I think you'd do well with any of them.

-Laura

lns said:

I've always wanted an OM1
My FM2n is a nice, lightweight camera that's about the same size.

Click to expand...

Welllll, I wouldn't say that. It's still definitely larger and heavier.
I really like the OM-1's viewfinder-it's easier for me to use with glasses than the FM series, even though its magnification is higher. Same with my Pentaxes too. I wish Nikon had injected its F3 viewfinder goodness into the FM series. It's my main criticism of those wonderfully built machines.

Sheebay said:

OK I've actually now purchased a nikon fm2n body, so please no stories involving the glory of olympus oms...

Click to expand...

I won't say any more than, "What a shame. You're missing out!!"

-Bill

(OM1 since 1975)

lxdude said:

Welllll, I wouldn't say that. It's still definitely larger and heavier.
....

Click to expand...

Okay, I've looked it up. Because as I said, I have always wanted an OM-1. You intrigued me. I needed to know whether I can continue to live happily without it.

Dimensions of the OM-1: size in inches is 5.35 (w) x 3.27 (h) x 1.97 (d); weight is 510 grams (18.0 ounces).

Dimensions of FM2n: size in inches is 5.6 x 3.5 x 2.4; weight is 540 grams (19 ounces).

While the OM-1 is definitely the champion, the FM2n is pretty close. At least, close enough for me. Though perhaps I only say that because my other Nikon is an F3HP, which, comparatively, is a beast.

-Laura

I guess it's personal taste but I prefer Nikons (FM2n and F3) over OM or Pentax M series. Maybe I have big hands.

Re lenses, if you are not familiar with old Nikons, all non-AI lenses won't fit on FM2n. Get AI or AIS.

Any 50mm is good but I prefer f2 over f1.8.