The Olympus OM cult

[Prest_400]

Under the image you will see various URLs "email IM" "direct" "IMG code"..
Do a click (single one is enough) on the "IMG code", you'll see a yellow message "copied"; then just past it here. I did a preview and it worked.

 

[Vincent Brady]

 

[Vincent Brady]

To Prest 400
THANKS A MILLION
I hope you enjoy the reviews.

Cheers
TEX

 

[Prest_400]

You're welcome TEX. This reviews are great.
Just curious, What year do they date from?

 

[Vincent Brady]

Prest 400 they were published in Practical Photography Feb. 1991 and I cut them out as I was expanding on my lenses at the time. I did manage to buy the 21mm, 24mm and the 85mm all second hand. The 24 mm became my most used lens for my landscape work especially when using Kodak HIE. I never really got into using the 21mm lens and I used the 85mm for portraits.

Cheers
TEX

 

[Jim Baker]

I can remember reading the artice! The 50mm lenses and the 24mm lens are superb. The article's conclusion about the 200mm lens surprised me so I carried out some tests myself. They were not very scientific, I just shot a scene with different lenses and compared the images side-by-side. Eventually, I managed to compare the 200mm f4, 200mm f5, 180mm f2.8 and the 65-200 f4 zoom (at 200mm). In descending order of sharpness (at f8): f4, f2.8, f5, f4(zoom). In descending order of colour fringing (at f8): f4, f5, f4(zoom), f2.8. The f4 and the f5 lenses were quite similar. Overall, I was pleased with the 200mm f4 and it was the only lens I kept. I felt it was worth having the extra 2/3 stop (over the f5). The biggest suprprise was the colour fringing of the 180mm f2.8. That said, I have a 50 x 30 cm print on my wall taken with this lens and, although I can see colour fringing if I really look, I don't think it detracts from the photo.

 

[Vincent Brady]

Thanks for the feedback Jim and I'm glad that you kept the 200mm f4. I must confess that I have not come across this term "colour fringing" before, but maybe that's because I shoot mainly B&W and colour slides.

Cheers
Vincent

 

[Jim Baker]

Lateral chromatic aberration is the correct term. It arises because light of different wavelengths from a source is focussed at different locations on the film (print or slide film, it just has to be colour). It's most apparent when there is a light/dark boundary e.g. a white window frame against a dark background: one side will have a purple line along the edge and the other side will have a red line. It generally gets worse as the lens focal length increases. A lens which corrects for this at two wavelengths is called an achromat and a lens that corrects for this at three wavelengths is called an apochromat. My 300mm f4.5 while not an apo is not bad, given it's long focal length. In very general terms, cemented doublets (where two lenses of different glass are glued together to make a composite lens) are used to correct chromatic aberration. I note the 300mm f4.5 has two doublets but the 180mm f2.8 has none.

 

[Prest_400]

Also, lenses without chromatic aberration correction need refocusing for infrared photography. That's why most manual lenses (as Zuikos) have the red line in the DoF scale, and other manufacturers have different shapes. Because the red wavelenght is focused farther on the film plane. Apochromatic lenses do not need this focus correction for infrared.

 

[Vincent Brady]

I have read about refocusing the lens at the red line when using IR film, but because I use the 24mm lens and shoot at f16, I rarely have bothered refocusing. Image sharpness is not a problem in my IR work, now if you mentioned correct exposure that's a totally different story.

 

[Vincent Brady]

[

 

[Vincent Brady]

I 've added an article from Amateur Photographer by John Perriment in praise of the OM 4Ti date from May 2000.

Cheers
TEX

 

[Allan Swindles]

Nice timing TEX, I've recently added an OM4Ti body to my system and, shamefully, not yet had the chance to try it but I'm certainly encouraged by the article. It's been on my 'wish' list for a while and I managed to find one in excellent condition at a price I could afford.

 

[haclil]

For years I've doted on my OM4Ti's and done lots of macro work. However, none of my macro gear is Olympus or Zuiko. (I've used a reversed normal and a Tamron 60-300SP combined with extenders and teleconverters!)

My question is, what is/are the most versatile of Zuiko macro lenses? I need all the depth of field I can get: Often I find myself shooting water surfaces from an angle of c 30 degr from the vertical.

Any suggestions out there?

BTW, this is the first cult I've ever joined!

 

[Ken N]

Either of the two 50mm macros would do, but in your specific application, longer lenses with smaller aperture will compose a little better and still give you the same DoF.

 

[Prest_400]

Well, this thread has stayed inactive. It's still "pre-KR64 demise".

From time to time, somekind of spots appear in the chrome of the camera. Passing a microfiber cloth over removes them, but, I'm curious. Has anyone experienced those spots on chrome? I'm sure they aren't water related.
When I clean it, I usually only use the microfiber cloth. But at times, I use single use glass cleaning cloth. I suppose that the alcohol in it doesn't damage paint or the chrome in the camera.

Well, if all goes well, I should head to Asia. Tropical climate. Condensation and the damp climate worries me a bit; Fungus and damage to the mechanics. Any advice?

 

[Allan Swindles]

Plastic bags and lots of Silica Gel., but remember to dry it out regularly.

 

[Rick A]

Howdy everyone. I bought my first Olympus, an FTL, just before the OM's hit the market, still using Oly gear. My last OM-4 has been in need of a CLA for a few years, so I finally broke down and bought an OM-1md and am waiting for its arrival(drat-mondays a holiday-no mail)I have been using my brand x (starts with a C)and my XA's also 4x5 and 6x6. I've been seriously missing my Oly, I love the ergonomics and the Zuiko glass.

 

[Prest_400]

The group is kind of inactive lately.

Well, it's been two months since I returned from my Trip. The Kodachrome I shot is perfect (the film lives up to it's legendary reputation) and the OM-1 and Zuikos performed perfectly.

I overlooked the dangers of the climate and recently I've found that the 50mm has grown fungus (very faint and difficult to see), well, a replacement costs around 20€ and this one might be useful as a loupe. I am a little worried about infection on the other lenses, as they all go in the same body, still no traces of fungus.

It is amusing to read my early posts. Through this years I "cured" the "Zuikoholism" and learned to love the cheap Zuikos. Matured, as well.

 

[bluedog]

Hi everyone. I only just stumbled across this group tonight. I have been an OM user for over 30 years. I have accumulated 3 OM's and a few zuiko lenses over the journey. In my opinion the zuiko lenses are second to none, fabulous glass. Too bad Olympus jumped off the film bandwagon. My favorite camera to use is my OM-4 and I am thinking about getting a spare just in case my old one dies. If only someone would build a new camera like that now. I was looking at swapping over to Nikon recently, however, the OM system is hard to beat and in the end I decided to stay with it.

 

[mopar_guy]

Bluedog,
Your post sound almost exactly like my own experience. Welcome to our little Cult.
Dave

 

[Chris Sweetman]

Hi all

Just down to my last roll of Kodachrome KR64. It was surfing the net one night that I came across The Kodachrome Project. This was around 18 months ago. So to join in the fun and shoot Kodachrome again I dusted off my OM cameras and Zuiko lenses and went out there!

I have my own little projects like taking photos of my local church in all seasons, family at Christmas, Nottingham landscapes etc... It has been a fun and an enjoyable experience. So much so that I will continue to load these cameras with film and continue to use this stuff.

Cheers Chris

 

[Prest_400]

Hi and welcome Bluedog.
The OM system is excellent. Lenses deliver more than I will ever need and the bodies are nicely designed, that's my experience over 2 years with an OM-1 and the basic range lenses. I'm far from having those 30 years of experience, but slowly time will tell.
I'm young and hope these cameras will be able to last for a lifetime and more. It would be interesting to know what did my OM-1 see in it's 30 years of life, and I hope it will keep working well for at least 30 more.

 

[drmarkf]

I've just joined (slightly sadly & ironically, because I came across this site while searching for OM equipment information to use while selling some of my OM kit ).

However, my remaining Zuiko OM and compatible lenses are now getting a massive lease of life via adapters on my E-PL1 micro 4/3 body, and I'm certainly looking to buy some more classic Zuiko glass to try. So I'd like to stay, please!

My OM-4 hadn't been used for longer than I can remember, and I needed the space and cash to re-invest! I'm hopeful that the rumoured Oly micro 4/3 'professional' body that's said to be due in the spring will replace some of what I got from the OM system over 30+ years (and which was lost with much of the drive for digital). By this I mean quality of feel and handling; compact dimensions, low weight and rugged build; as well as the good glass and viewfinders.

The E-PL1 gets surprisingly close in a number of areas: the VF-2 electronic viewfinder's fantastic, the image quality is slightly better than my E-620, it's compact and light and feels fairly good in the hands. I love the ability to use legacy lenses. However, some aspects of handling are grim - like the number of button pushes to change the aperture of a digital lens...

Briefly, I was bought an OM-1 in 1973 for a 21st birthday present, and then went to the OM-4 second hand in 1990. I've owned a variety of Zuiko glass over the years (and now own probably more E-Zuikos, Panasonics & Leica lenses than is strictly good for me).

 

[mopar_guy]

Digital cameras with OM lenses aren't going to impress too many people around here.

Dave