Olympus v Nikon

[btaylor]

Isn't the voltage of a silver cell different than the voltage of a mercury battery? like, 1.5V vs 1.35V or so. Some meters designed to use mercury batteries are notably inaccurate when used with silver batteries (which in turn can be alleviated by re-calibrating the meter.) Can't remember which camera(s) was/were concerned, but neither Olympus OM nor Nikon if I remember correctly. More like rangefinders from the 70's.

All the solutions are expensive and not good.

The fix is called a C.R.I.S. adapter. About $35 from the original manufacturers, or $20 for a Chinese knock off. I have both, they both work fine. They regulate the voltage to down to 1.35v so everything works correctly.

 

[Bob Bibab]

F and F2 bodies are quite a bit heavier and larger than the FM's, especially with a metered finder attached. F3 is closer in size to the FM, but still a few hundred grams heavier. The F-series bodies feel more durable, but the FM-series have been proven over time to be very durable.
My chrome FM was my main hiking & backpacking camera for years and never failed once.
The F bodies have interchangeable finders, faster motor drives and manual mirror lockup capability. The FM's have a vertical-travel shutter and thus a faster flash sync speed; 1/250 for the FM2. Also a top shutter speed of 1/4000 where the F2 and F3 only hit 1/2000, if that matters to you. Also, The F3 shutter is electronically controlled, so only 1/90 and B if your battery dies.

The FMs don't have mirror lock up?

 

[abruzzi]

I’m not sure the FM, but I believe the way to get mirror lockup on an FM2 it to take a shot with the self timer. The mirror locks up when you press the shutter release, then it takes the picture ~8 seconds later. It’s not a manual mirror locks, and there are some situations where you can’t use it, but it does cover a lot of the mirror lockup situations.

 

[CMoore]

I've been using Olympus OM bodies and lenses for 45 years, and heartily recommend them. That even includes the bodies that require more frequent change of batteries - my OM-2s has been a warrior since I bought it new, and keeping a couple of extra batteries on hand is easy, and in recent years when I've owned OM-1 or OM-1n bodies, the battery adapters are cheap and easy to use.
Does the size difference between the two lines matter to you? The OM lenses are also usually smaller than their Nikon counterparts.
That being said, if you like the Nikon mount lenses you have, and like the Nikon film bodies available to you, than I wouldn't recommend against them for you. I just wouldn't like them as much for me.
To provide you with context, my current OM kit includes my favorite three lens kit - 24mm f/2.8, 35mm f/2, 85mm f/2 - plus my choice of OM2s, OM2n, OM-G and OM-4T bodies, and a whole bunch of other lenses that I use less frequently.
As far as reliability is concerned, other than a bit of preventative maintenance, my OM lenses and bodies have required a total of one repair in 45 years - a mirror that required re-attachment after the glue failed about 40 years in.
Here is a photo of my OM-2s in 2010, on the occasion of my unloading my very last roll of Kodachrome. It shows just a bit of wear
View attachment 246894

Just because i see it in your picture.... did you experience any kind of Problem or Breakage when using a soft-shutter with your OM bodies.?
Thank You

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Not "without a meter". Within a meter. I.e. close focus.

Which Nikons do you have?

I see! I have Vivitar 20mm 3.8 which is focusing within few centimetres.

F2 (50 USD), Nikkormat (20 USD) and EM (35 USD).

EM with Tokina 24 f2.8.

 

[MattKing]

Just because i see it in your picture.... did you experience any kind of Problem or Breakage when using a soft-shutter with your OM bodies.?
Thank You

Yes - I keep losing them!
Otherwise no.

 

[BradS]

Nikon. Definitely Nikon.

 

[CMoore]

Yes - I keep losing them!
Otherwise no.

Yeah, i have the same problem....but less so (i think) with my Nikon F2
Anyway, i TRY to get in the habit of checking the softy for tightness, but sometimes i forget.
I have NEVER felt them to be loose in any way, but then you look down, and all of a sudden it is gone.
It was there for frame-25, but somehow it is gone for frame-26.

 

[Bob Bibab]

At one time, I shot mainly with rangefinders and TLRs. To give me more focal length flexibility, I replaced the 6x6cm TLR camera with a 6x7cm SLR (RB67). If I were in your position, I would consider an RZ67 with built-in light meter.

I was looking at medium format for a while. I decided against it for a couple of reasons. I think it makes me too hesitant to experiment given you only get 12 shots out of a roll and the cost of each frame can add up quickly. Also if I want to shoot medium format, I still have the rollei.

But if I were to go down the medium format route, you would recommend the Mamiya over the Blads?

 

[Bob Bibab]

Any thoughts on what is a good price to pay for an F1,2,3 or a FM2? Prices appear to vary widely.

 

[Chan Tran]

Any thoughts on what is a good price to pay for an F1,2,3 or a FM2? Prices appear to vary widely.

Check Ebay for prices and you're in London so it's difficult for me in in USA to tell. If you want built in meter don't get the F because your Zeiss lenses don't have the meter coupling for them. Also not the F2 Photomic, F2S or F2SB. For the F2 you should pick either the F2A or F2AS. The F2A price is very reasonable while the F2AS is very expensive. The F3 or F3HP prices are quite reasonable but it's battery dependent if you mind (I don't in fact I like it because of that). The FM2 or FM2n are quite expensive too. The FM is a lot less expensive.

 

[Les Sarile]

At the moment the main advantage of the Olympus seems to be size and weight. The Nikon's the build quality. Tell me if I am wrong please.

If the size and weight of the OM series is compelling, then perhaps you might consider the Pentax MX or LX.

Compared to the OM1, the MX is the smallest manual SLR with the biggest viewfinder magnification that shows shutter speed, aperture and meter and also has traditional control locations.
As you can see, the LX is practically the same size as these others but has the full selection of interchangeable viewfinders and focusing screens and is the only camera ever that can aperture priority expose a scene for as long as it takes (up to hours long) while monitoring the scene for changes in lighting and adjusting exposure accordingly.

BTW, having Zeiss lenses already for a Nikon is hard to argue against so maybe the Nikon FM3A would be a better choice since it is the only aperture priority capable camera with the full range of shutter speeds available when batteries die. The LX and Canon New F1 only has sync to top speed available when batteries die while the rest offer only sync speed.

BTW, I've tested all my bought used of unknown condition lenses and all of them will not be the reason you don't capture all the detail in a scene.

And of course it's a used market so prices will vary wildly. Just make sure they are fully functional and you have protection otherwise.

 

[Bob Bibab]

Thanks. I will check out the FM3A. Every bit of this hobby requires so much research.

 

[Chan Tran]

Thanks. I will check out the FM3A. Every bit of this hobby requires so much research.

The FM3a would be the most expensive Nikon film camera besides the F6. I do not think it's worth the price tag.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

FM3A cost is high.
I paid for working F2, EM and Nikkormat plus two 28mm, one 20, 19 and 24 mm lenses less than single FM3A body costs. In 2019, 2020.
Did you check your Zeiss lenses compatibility? Are you sure your ZF lenses will work on FM3A?
https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/are-zeiss-zf-lenses-for-nikon-worth-getting.148573/

 

[narsuitus]

But if I were to go down the medium format route, you would recommend the Mamiya over the Blads?

I have owned and used the Mamiya TLR, Mamiya RB67, Fuji 6x7 and 6x9 rangefinders, and the Yashica-Mat TLR. My personal favorite was the Mamiya TLR. I tried the Hasselblad but never ergonomically bonded with it and could never afford it.

 

[Les Sarile]

Thanks. I will check out the FM3A. Every bit of this hobby requires so much research.

This pushed me over after I read it -> https://imaging.nikon.com/history/chronicle/history-fm3a/index.htm

I even bought the magazine for it but haven't gottern the featured lens . . .

The K3 focusing screen that came with mine is a split prism that never blacks out regardless of how slow the lens is or if it is stopped down. I first saw this type of screen in my Canon New F1. Unfortunately, in a dark setting, it is near impossible to determine critical focus especially on a wide angle lens!

 

[Les Sarile]

But if I were to go down the medium format route, you would recommend the Mamiya over the Blads?

Well if you think 35mm cameras are heavy . . .

The Mamiya 7 might be a better choice, big MF rangefinder that's relatively lighter and smaller. Sorry, but that's one I don't have to compare.

 

[Bob Bibab]

Wow. Ok. That is a big difference in size. Not sure how i feel about lugging the Mamiya around.

As for the Mamiya 7 ... I suspect a bit out of my price range.

 

[Bob Bibab]

This pushed me over after I read it -> https://imaging.nikon.com/history/chronicle/history-fm3a/index.htm

I even bought the magazine for it but haven't gottern the featured lens . . .

The K3 focusing screen that came with mine is a split prism that never blacks out regardless of how slow the lens is or if it is stopped down. I first saw this type of screen in my Canon New F1. Unfortunately, in a dark setting, it is near impossible to determine critical focus especially on a wide angle lens!

Thanks. Much better resource than my random internet googling.

 

[Les Sarile]

Any thoughts on what is a good price to pay for an F1,2,3 or a FM2? Prices appear to vary widely.

BTW, there is no Nikon F1. Canon OTOH couldn't get enough of using F1 . . .

The meterless F and F2 are nice and I think the FM3A looks almost the part except for the the flash shoe. And potentially decades newer and therefore should last decades longer.

 

[Les Sarile]

Wow. Ok. That is a big difference in size. Not sure how i feel about lugging the Mamiya around.

As for the Mamiya 7 ... I suspect a bit out of my price range.

Also, if you're worried about mirror vibration on the 35mm cameras, you should hear - rather feel, the Mamiya RZ when the shutter fires! No cheap tripods for this big boy!

 

[eggen]

It depends on your hands. If your hands are small, then Olympus, if hands are big then Nikon.Both cameras are excellent. Results depends your skills.

 

[Alan Gales]

I hope I will not be crucified for saying this on a film forum:
if at some point you will have an interest in also shooting digital, the Nikon route allows to re-use your lenses with a digital body.

Heretic!

Just kidding. You make a very good point! Some here say they hate digital cameras but pretty much everyone here owns one in their cell phone. They probably occasionally use them too!

For the OP, I always loved the size of my old Contax 139. It was very slightly smaller than an OM-1. I also enjoyed my RZ67 and my current 8x10. You get used to what you are shooting. Pick what you like, Nikon or Olympus. It doesn't really matter. Since you all ready own a couple Nikon lenses, I'd say go that route. Plus you can buy a Nikon DSLR later if you want. Digital is great for eBay shots and for sending family snap shots on the web. I also prefer it for shooting sports. Film vs digital is like 35mm vs medium format vs large format film. It's all good in my opinion.

 

[Bob Bibab]

Heretic!

Just kidding. You make a very good point! Some here say they hate digital cameras but pretty much everyone here owns one in their cell phone. They probably occasionally use them too!

For the OP, I always loved the size of my old Contax 139. It was very slightly smaller than an OM-1. I also enjoyed my RZ67 and my current 8x10. You get used to what you are shooting. Pick what you like, Nikon or Olympus. It doesn't really matter. Since you all ready own a couple Nikon lenses, I'd say go that route. Plus you can buy a Nikon DSLR later if you want. Digital is great for eBay shots and for sending family snap shots on the web. I also prefer it for shooting sports. Film vs digital is like 35mm vs medium format vs large format film. It's all good in my opinion.

I actually had a D700. This is why I have some Nikon and Zeiss glass. Didn't really enjoy shooting it much (100s and 100s of photos never looked at again. 20 mindless shots of the exact same scene without giving much thought just in case one turned out to be slightly better - my neuroses probably ...). The film camera and the cost associated with shooting makes me value each frame. Which I what I need I think. And then there is physicality of the product and the suprise of seeing the final result. I also like old gear and mechanical stuff as objects in themselves. So I think film suits me better.

So I ended up giving my D700 to my dad with a couple of lenses. I think he enjoys it more than I would.

Any way, if I was going to go digital again I would go for a mirrorless Fujifilm. Don't see what the point of the mirror viewfinder is on a digital. All the disadvantages of bigger camera and bigger lenses (and optical corrections ...). Any advantage the optical viewfinder would have disappearing as chips get faster...