The Olympus OM2n..

[Huss]

Looks like John Hermanson can sell you another OM-2 back. But they're not cheap, and you'll have to swap in your current back's pressure plate yourself.

16 - OM Repair Parts

CORRECTION: These are listed as No Longer Available. I'd still write and ask him, John's a great guy.

Alternatively... look for a busted parts-only OM camera for a few bucks. There are plenty out there:

Used Film SLRs & Used SLR Cameras | UsedPhotoPro

We offer a huge selection of used SLR cameras at discount prices. Shop our wide selection of used digital cameras and receive free shipping on qualified orders. A trusted name for over 60 years buying, selling, and trading your used camera gear.

usedphotopro.com

You're right, way cheaper to just buy a whole OM-2 on ebay than the back from Hermanson!

 

[KerrKid]

There are some wonderful interviews with her on YouTube. Gives you a good idea of how she got her images.

Thanks! I'll definitely check those out.

 

[KerrKid]

There are some wonderful interviews with her on YouTube. Gives you a good idea of how she got her images.

Thanks. I watched a few of them and read several articles. I’m even happier to have bought the OM2n now, although I realize it’s not the wand, it’s the magician. I would really like to get the lenses she used, especially the 85mm.

A friend has an OM1 somewhere. He hasn’t used it for quite awhile and isn’t sure where it is. I’m going to try and talk him out of it.))

 

[oxcanary]

Interesting. I own an OM 1N that has a film memo holder on the back. Was the camera ever offered with this, or during its lifetime has someone substituted an OM 2 back?

 

[MattKing]

Interesting. I own an OM 1N that has a film memo holder on the back. Was the camera ever offered with this, or during its lifetime has someone substituted an OM 2 back?

That may reflect the change from OM-1 to OM-1 MD to OM-1n - I don't recall if there was a memo holder on my 1n's back, but I'm sure there wasn't one on my OM-1.

 

[KerrKid]

Question concerning Jane Brown's typical camera setting as reported: 1/60th second and f2.8. If I set my camera to f2.8 in Auto and it returns a shutter speed of 1/125th second, why would that be a problem?

 

[Dali]

Turn off the light.

 

[MattKing]

Question concerning Jane Brown's typical camera setting as reported: 1/60th second and f2.8. If I set my camera to f2.8 in Auto and it returns a shutter speed of 1/125th second, why would that be a problem?

Jane Bown "metered" with her eye and judgment. And she often worked in relatively little light.

 

[KerrKid]

Jane Bown "metered" with her eye and judgment. And she often worked in relatively little light.

This is what I've read. But that means if she used fixed settings then she must have made sure to take photographs in just the amount of light that would work for those settings. No mean feat. I can't argue with the results but its hard to imagine she didn't use a bit of bracketing at times.

 

[MattKing]

No, she also did her own darkroom work, and wasn't too concerned about grain or the appearance of shadow detail.
That combination was chosen because her technique permitted usable results in lousy light.

 

[KerrKid]

No, she also did her own darkroom work, and wasn't too concerned about grain or the appearance of shadow detail.
That combination was chosen because her technique permitted usable results in lousy light.

Makes sense. Also, didn't she use Tri-X? That has a lot of latitude, correct? Well, whatever she did, I really like her work and hope I can get close to those results some day.

 

[Neil Morgan]

I still lust for the OM-3, and find it remarkable that it is 5-7x the price of an Olympus M-1 (yes, I have the precursor to OM-1).

The 3ti is even more ridiculous, it never was cheap but prices now are crazy - however, it is my favourite 35mm SLR

 

[KerrKid]

Between the 100mm f2.8 and the Vivitar 90mm f2.5 macro by Tokina, which lens would you buy first? My goal for this focal length is a good walk-around lens and not necessarily a portrait lens.

 

[FriedLouisStudio]

No knock on that Vivitar... but I LOVE the Zuiko 100/2.8. It's tied with my 35/2 for my most-used OM lens. It's like the little brother of my beloved non-AI Nikkor 105/2.5.... but smaller.

And it's a GREAT walk-around lens.

 

[KerrKid]

No knock on that Vivitar... but I LOVE the Zuiko 100/2.8. It's tied with my 35/2 for my most-used OM lens. It's like the little brother of my beloved non-AI Nikkor 105/2.5.... but smaller.

And it's a GREAT walk-around lens.

View attachment 337388 View attachment 337390 View attachment 337391 View attachment 337392 View attachment 337394 View attachment 337395 View attachment 337396 View attachment 337397 View attachment 337398

Good to hear! I thought it was a nice lens but, of course, there are always those who say it's garbage and to get the f2 version instead. I need to save up for the 35/2.

I like your photos. Especially the first and second ones.

 

[FriedLouisStudio]

It's very much not garbage. I've never found 2.8 limiting on SLR lenses. 3.5 is where the viewfinder starts getting dark.

Yeah, those first two are late-90s prints I only scanned recently. The 100/2.8 on my OM-G and dear departed Plus-X.

The next two are recent, negative scans from two years ago on FP4 Plus.

The rest are mostly early 2000s, Kodak Supra or High Definition, but just 100 or 200dpi print scans. You know, back when JPG file sizes were a thing because storage and internet transport weren't infinite and instantaneous.

 

[KerrKid]

Too bad about Plus-X. I used to shoot that and Tri-X. I was thinking of getting some Tri-X or HP5+ the next time I order film. I've never used FP4 Plus, but heard good things about that, too. I guess it depends on what look you want to achieve.

I may look into one of the other OM's down the road. I was going to bid on another OM2n recently, but I decided to spend on lenses instead.

 

[MattKing]

There is little reason to prefer the f/2 versions of the common Zuiko lenses over their f/2.8 versions, other than their greater speed and the brighter viewing and marginally easier focusing that the larger aperture gives you.

 

[btaylor]

Yes, marginally brighter viewfinder. I have no complaints with my 100mm f2.8 Zuiko, I’m so glad I got it instead of the more common 135mm which I find too long most of the time. I lusted after the Zuiko 85mm f2, but settled on the Tamron SP 90mm f2.5 macro. And it is great- very sharp, and the macro feature is very handy and convenient, the extra distance from the close subject is nice to have.

 

[KerrKid]

Why do OM2n’s sell so cheaply? I got the first one with 2 nice lens for $47 and I just bought another OM2n body for $36 after the seller declined my offer of $26.

No one else bid on the camera. I can’t figure this out. These are really nice cameras and seem to place high on the “if you could only have one 35mm camera” lists.

What am I missing?

 

[MattKing]

Why do OM2n’s sell so cheaply? I got the first one with 2 nice lens for $47 and I just bought another OM2n body for $36 after the seller declined my offer of $26.

No one else bid on the camera. I can’t figure this out. These are really nice cameras and seem to place high on the “if you could only have one 35mm camera” lists.

What am I missing?

It makes no sense to this long time OM user, but I am not unbiased.
The only thing I can attribute it to is the fact that they are battery dependent.

 

[KerrKid]

Yes, maybe batteries, but when did 2 SR44’s break the bank? Besides, I think they last a long time in this model.

I can pick up a nice OM1 for a song, too. Why is that?

It’s a head-scratcher since the OM’s get compared to Leicas so often.

 

[Anon Ymous]

Why do OM2n’s sell so cheaply? I got the first one with 2 nice lens for $47 and I just bought another OM2n body for $36 after the seller declined my offer of $26.

No one else bid on the camera. I can’t figure this out. These are really nice cameras and seem to place high on the “if you could only have one 35mm camera” lists.

What am I missing?

Impressive, but I suspect it only happens in the US. Over here, in Europe, prices are much higher.

 

[MattKing]

Well, the OM-1 needs a no longer available battery, or one of various work-arounds.
And the fact that the later cameras (other than the rare and expensive OM3) essentially don't function at all without a battery.
I think it is more important that Olympus never successfully (market-wise) incorporated auto-focus, and its approach to digital was not to make any practical use of the existing lenses.

 

[MattKing]

Impressive, but I suspect it only happens in the US. Over here, in Europe, prices are much higher.

The OM film system appears to have been very popular in the UK in particular. It was quite popular in Canada.
The differences might be due to the fact that Olympus used independent local distributors rather than subsidiaries of the manufacturer.