Best lens for OM10

I have started playing with an old Olympus OM10 (with manual adapter)

essentially because I find my digital camera (Canon EOS 10d) cumbersome and

intrusive much of the time with Sigma lenses attached.

 

I have been toying with the idea of buying a second hand Leica as an

alternative but would be grateful to hear people's views as to whether (i) the

OM10 is a good enough quality alternative if I want to take really high

quality informal / reportage style shots and (ii) whether I can do better than

the 50mm Olympus OM-system Zuiko MC Auto-S 1.8 lens that is attached to the

camera. If so, which other lens should I try to get my hands on, or am I

better off starting from scratch with an alternative camera? I photograph

mostly in B&W.

 

Any advice would be much appreciated.

 

Dan

Hi dAN,

 

If you actually want "really high quality" with film then you need a larger camera with larger film. An old Rolleicord for $200 will give you "really high quality" quality. If you want a rangefinder the Fuji GSW690111 will give you even better quality, bigger film gate.

 

A good compromise with autofocus and zoom lens in the Fuji645zi, when used with slow film the results are very very good.

 

However for most purposes the OM10 "is good enough", also uses a variety of interesting focal lengths.

 

However, since you fin your "Canon EOS 10d cumbersome" then why not spend alot of money on a little Leica and see what happens....

 

Cheers.

Thanks. By "cumbersome" I essentially mean that the EOS10d is very heavy, especially as the lenses are BIG.

 

Are the Rolleicord and the 2 Fuji's medium format? I really want something light.

 

If I do press on with the OM10 is the lens the best one to go for?

 

Thanks again

The OM-10 is a very nice little camera; I used one for years. Apart from going rangefinder

like Leica, you won't find less obtrusive quality cameras than the Olympus OMs. One step

up would be an OM-2n or OM-2sp, which are going for good prices these days. And you

simply can't beat on OM-4 (Ti or not) when it comes to manual SLRs!

 

As for lenses, the 50/1.8 is quite good, but I prefer the faster sharper and generally

"yummier" 50/1.4.

 

The 100/2.8 makes a great portrait lens and the 24/2.8 is great for wide angles. You

might also like a 28mm or 35mm for the reportage you want to do.

 

Hope that helps!

Yep, medium format, the Rolleicords are very light. I used a Rolleicord 5 and the results were satisfying. A cheaper intro would be Yashica 124G, still a very good camera.

 

Cheers.

I think the 50mm lens you have already is fine for the job but you may wish to add a wider lens sometime. An alternative is to pick up a cheap 35mm rangefinder with a standard lens, and start from there. You will get a smaller camera and a brighter view.

Why do so many pepole fear their lens isn't good enough for them? The laws of physics are the same for everyone. Zuiko lenses give best results at the 30 times range of the focal length. For example: 30*50mm=1500mm

But it doesn't matter anyway what camera you use. Read this: http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/notcamera.htm

The OM-10 is a good camera, although maybe not as reliable long-term as its brothers OM-1,2,3 and 4, and many of the lenses are excellent.

 

On my OM-3, I mostly use the 21mm 3.5, one of the 50mm (there are several, and most of them are good, some are excellent) and the 100mm 2.8.

 

The quality of the OM-Zuiko lenses is best illustrated by the fact that they are becoming increasingly popular among Canon 5D-users (They can all be used on EOS-cameras, including the 10D, with an inexpensive adapter), not least the 21mm 3.5

 

These days, I mostly shoot b&w with my OM-cameras, an area where film is still miles ahead of digital.

 

Good luck with your OM-10

In as much as a camera body is simply a light tight box to hold film flat, the OM10 serves the purpose. I prefer the ergonomics of the OM1n and OM2n over the OM10 but at the end of the day the lenses make the photo. Personally I always like a little on either side the 50 as my prime lens. I tend to use a Zuiko 35f2, a 55f1.2 and a 100f2.8 as my kit system. I understand the Zuiko 85f2 is a superlative lens but haven't had the pleasure ... (yet).

 

I opted to switch brands when I went digital (dare I say it ... Nikon) but would never part with my OM gear - black and white and Ilford forever!

 

Jim

The 50mm f/1.8 must be the cheapest lens available for your camera... but don't let that fool you: optically, it is as good as anything else. Not sure on the reason, but the "normal" focal length seems to be the easiest for the lens makers to make with minimal optical problems. (Of course, you may have a bad copy: test it, and see for yourself!).

 

By the way, I too have a 10D and I agree with you about the bulk of it, but I use my Olympus lenses on my 10D with the use of an adapter. This way, at least the lenses are small. You need to focus manually though, which can be challenging with the small viewfinder. Just letting you know your options...

Either the Olympus 28mm f3.5 or f2.8. Keep the 50mm f 1.8. In a back issue of Pop Photo where several 'fast 50's' were tested, it held its own against the competition. Add a short tele such as the 100mm f2.8 or even the short tele zoom: 70-150 f4. I have the zoom and get great results. Unlike many zooms now, it is a constant aperture at all focal lengths.

If you do get into the Olympus system, you may want to add an OM-1 because it will work even without batteries.

have to agree with an earlier post. if you want better quality then you have to go medium format. Some nerds will go on and on about differences between lenses, but for all intents and purposes a 35mm image is a 35mm image. You are not going to see much difference, if any.

 

The 50mm lens is an excellent place to start. You can learn about framing pictures, which is more important than anything, before you move on to other lenses.

 

I still use a 50mm lens for 95% of my shots. It's an honest view of the world, and when I look through the viewfinder, it shows what I see. (of course certain applications, like macro, sports or wildlife insist on different lenses.)

 

But for reportage, 50mm is perfect. Load up some 400ASA black and white film, set the aperture to F11 and the focus to the hyperfocal setting and just click away, without worrying about anything other than the moment and the picture.

Like some of your other replies I's also suggest you go for the 50mm f1.8 but consider a more reliable camera body. The OM1 is as close to perfect a fully manual slr as you'll find anywhere. I can also vouch for the quality and reliability of the OM4.

I think the Zuiko 50mm/1.8 is not just a great lens but one of the best 50mm ever produced for an slr. As for the 50/1.4 I can only say that mine, after rigorous testing, shows poor performance. Perhaps mine is just a bad one.

 

As for non-obtrusive reportage shooting, you are just in the right path with the OM system. But you should be aware of the limitations of the OM and of the Leica systems.

 

The real edge of the OM, being a very succesful SLR system, is versatility, size, and price/convenience ratio. Among the different SLRs, the OMs are the smallest, and the OM1 (and OM1n) the most silent one.

 

Yet the most silent SLR is totally out of competence vis a vis the Leicas, in terms of noise. Here in my opinion starts the dividing line upon which you should think very well before you start building your system. If the noise of the OM1 is acceptable to you, then you have saved a lot of money and gained the tremendous versatility of the SLR system, or at least the potential of it.

 

Now, in case that upon your estimation you will seldom need a silent shooter like a Leica, but sometimes yes, then you could complement your OM body with a super small and super quiet fixed lens Rangefinder: the Olympus RC.

 

But if street photography is what you are after, then no SLR, nor the best SLR plus something can help.

 

Cheers,

Ruben