New Om-1(n) Owner Googling Her Life Away For Answers

<p>Greetings & Salutations!<br>

New to photo.net and I recently acquired an Olympus OM1(n) camera. I have always been interested in photography but not so much the digital side. I'm used to shooting with Polaroid Land cameras (there isn't much skill needed) and wanted to branch out to an old 35mm!<br>

With the Olympus I also received a Zuiko 50mm 1.8 lens, a Vivitar Automatic Tele Converter 2x, and a Vivitar 75-205mm 3.8 lens. I have only shot one roll of film so far with the 50mm, and was oh-so-pleasantly surprised with how beautiful some of the indoor-close up shots turned out. The outdoor-close ups came out a little more grainy, but my real concern is with the scenery shots. Every one of them came out blurry. Is it because I need a tripod and it cannot be a handheld shot? Or do I need to opt for a different lens?<br>

<br />I love to travel and have taken most of my bigger scenery shots with my Polaroid Land 450 while backpacking, but am super excited to switch over to a much lighter and more versatile camera. Any advice on this (or anything with the OM1 for that matter) would be fantastic. If you have any recommendations on what lenses I should keep a lookout for, that would be best for wide scenery shots, I would love that as well!<br>

<br />Thank ya thank ya - Jess</p>

<p>When you say blurry, do you mean out of focus, motion blur, or both? Which lens did this happen with? What kind/ISO of film? Time of day? Were you using a tripod?</p>

<p>With my Olympii I am quite fond of the 24/2.8, 35/2.8, 50/3.5 macro, 85/2. I also like the OM 35-105 and the small, inexpensive 35-70.</p>

Out of focus, but through the viewfinder

I am unable to focus the far away shots

anyhow and figured the focus was

mainly for close-ups so I shot away.

I was not using a tripod but just

pointing and shooting. I believe it was

older Kodak film 400 b&w.. a friend

gave me a bunch of older film to

practice with, and it was the middle of

the day with plenty of sun, maybe

slightly cloudy for all of the distance

shots.

Thank you for the response & the recs,

are there any particular reasons why

you are fond of those lenses?

<p>That's a wonderful camera. I owned mine during the nineties, also with the 50/1.8 Zuiko - a fabulous lens. Since you're looking through the lens as you change focus you should be seeing sharpness as you rotate the focusing barrel out toward the infinity symbol, for faraway subjects. The only possibility I can offer is that maybe the internal lens elements are no longer properly aligning as you change focus. Is this occurring with both lenses you mentioned? If so, I have no idea.</p>

<p>I am also curious as to whether the out of focus images happened with both lenses.</p>

<p>I own around 20 OM lenses and five bodies in Olympus mount. Those lenses I mentioned are my favorites for their image quality, which is not too harsh. I am also fond of the single-coated lenses for their light veiled flare. </p>

<p>"The outdoor-close ups came out a little more grainy" may point to over-exposure. Are the troublesome negatives very dense? As I recall, the OM-1 was designed to take the 1.35 volt mercury cells that cannot now be had. Is it possible to compare your meter's readings with those of one known to be good?</p>

<p>Also on the issue of out of focus, I am curious if you wear eyeglasses. If so, and they are corrected to 20/20 vision, and you wear them when focusing the camera, when you look thru the viewfinder and focus on an object 100 yds or so away (infinity for all practical purposes with a 50mm lens), is the image you see in focus. The same question for your other lens. If not there could be several explanations; 1) you may need a diopter lens on the eyepiece to correct your vision, 2) or the viewfinder screen (which is interchangeable with others) may not be properly seated, 3) there may be something obstructing your moving the focus ring to the infinity position, 4) if only 1 lens, there may be an issue with the seating of the lens. If you wear eyeglasses and don't wear them when focusing the camera, you probably need a diopter correction lens on the eyepiece.</p>

<p>Howard - when I rotate the lens I can easily focus on objects close in range, but everything far away is out of focus, I had someone else look through it that owns a Canon A1 and said as long as I have it on "infinity" then those distance shots will come out focused. Also I had only used the 50mm lens with that roll, the other one is fairly large and heavy so I was hoping to get the hang of that one.</p>

<p>Luis - I am not sure what you mean by the dense negatives, still new at this ^_^ .. also I did use the meter for all of the first roll's shots, I am not sure if it's accurate, I don't own a separate one but I guess I should look into it!</p>

<p>Stephen - I wear contacts :)</p>

<p>Here are examples (sorry I don't own a scanner, student budgets ;) please excuse the reflections)<br>

This is the very first photo I took, indoors & with the light meter...<br>

<a title="Olympus1 by yessyones, on Flickr" href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/89171019@N05/8123095954/"><img src="http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8184/8123095954_cfe86e5174.jpg" alt="Olympus1" width="500" height="331" /></a><br>

These are some close-up outdoor photos..<br>

<a title="photo 3 by yessyones, on Flickr" href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/89171019@N05/8123095456/"><img src="http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8474/8123095456_d0ba0f2d45.jpg" alt="photo 3" width="500" height="359" /></a><br>

<a title="Olympus2 by yessyones, on Flickr" href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/89171019@N05/8123078331/"><img src="http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8471/8123078331_71e5573b07.jpg" alt="Olympus2" width="500" height="336" /></a><br>

And here are the far away shots...<br>

<a title="photo 1 by yessyones, on Flickr" href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/89171019@N05/8123078155/"><img src="http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8047/8123078155_cc0397976c.jpg" alt="photo 1" width="500" height="353" /></a><br>

<a title="photo 2 by yessyones, on Flickr" href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/89171019@N05/8123078043/"><img src="http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8048/8123078043_f5019a2fbc.jpg" alt="photo 2" width="500" height="337" /></a></p>

<p> </p>

<p>Wow, Jessica, this is a forensic mystery for us old timers. Thoughts come flooding in. The Olympus like those of its generation requires some handling to get everything in order. It would be nice, for any old cameras, to have it with the 50mm checked out by a reliable repair service. I have two oldies, the Canon T90-not quite as old as the OM-1, and I had it serviced for about 125.00 each. Should be good for five years at least. (Cheaper than a transmission change on my old car lol). If you have a shutterbug friend, you can ask him or her to look at the lens and try to focus on various subjects with real detail and then examine slides you get.... I mean try a test roll using a color slide film to get away from possible conceivable processing glitches. I mean you eliminate the variable of the processing step if you see what I mean. <br /> Where did you get the camera? A gift? It may not have been looked at or given tune up for thirty years, it is possible. The variables are enormous. Is it in good cosmetic shape, or has it been beaten up? Good looks though are not enough for oldies, they need a medical checkup now and then so to speak.<br /> If most of us here had ten minutes with the camera, with a mag light flashlight and a magnifier glass, we could tell a lot or give you a clue.. Then I'd compare the light readings with a handheld meter to see if that exposurew part is good. <br /> Diagnosing this by this thread is a little like telling what a pink and blue body rash is from online. Actually tougher. Too early to talk about lenses, friend. <br /> Have the whole kit looked at and get an estimate for cleaning, lubing and adjustment of meter and replacement of any foam strips, that kind of stuff. Save the cost of film. Also test it with the best and freshest slide film you can find. I wish you well. Best advice I can conjure up today.<br>

PS. To ask the obvious question: For backpacking, think about other cameras that are closer to the Polaroid for ease of use and much lighter. I mean I still have a Leica Mini F 2.8. Many of this ilk can be had for a song and weigh less than a dry freeze entree. (Are you totally set on not going digital at all? .. I loved my Canon film stuff,but I had to get away from the processing part. Not to be intrusive, but just curious.) Backpackers go for teeny ones that still give great results. When I hiked I carried a small tripod, or table top pod. Was worth it, no matter the subject matter of a landscape. But thass meee...</p>

<p>Jessica - I'm reading between the lines here, so please bear with me. You wear contacts when shooting which presumably correct your vision to 20/20. However, when you use a viewfinder on your OM-1, it assumes that your eyes are focusing on a screen which is fairly close (I don't remember the exact distance, but for most SLR cameras it is less than 3 1/2 feet from the film plane)...if your contacts work for near vision as well as distance, all should be well when you focus your lens at infinity. Most SLR cameras have a built in -1/2 diopter. I wear progressive lenses when I shoot, and for some cameras, in order to have the viewfinder sharp and crisp when I'm focused at infinity, I need a diopter correction lens which brings the viewfinder to 0.0. That's the viewfinder part...which has virtually no effect on what is captured on the film. When the focus ring on the lens is turned to infinity, focusing on a distant object...you should see that object clearly in the viewfinder, AND, the object should be in focus at the film plane as well. A quick way to check, is to put the camera on a tripod, focus on something at infinity, with a cable release open the shutter on "bulb", open the back of the camera and place a translucent piece of tape, or ground glass across the film plane, and check it with a magnifier loupe...it should be in perfect focus. If it is not, then the lens or its focusing ring probably needs a slight adjustment. Also be aware that when focusing on a close object, especially at large apertures, distant objects will probably not be in focus. Lastly, sorry, I couldn't tell from the photos if the distant shots being out of focus were due to camera movement because of a slow shutter speed, or an optical issue.</p>

<p>Have used OM-1 for 38 years now and what others have said about having your vision corrected to see the screen clearly is very true. When I sold SLR's like the Olympus OM-1, Minolta's, Canon's, Nikon's etc. in the 1970's by far the most common reason for fuzzy shots was that the customer could not see the screen clearly enough to focus. However you seem to be able to focus close without problem. That is the puzzle. As others have stated the eyepiece is factory set to a certain diopter. It could be -1/2 (image on screen appears to be 2 meters away) or -1 (image at 1 meter distance). I'm not sure what the OM-1n is set for. perhaps John Hermanson at Camtech would know. Quickest test to see if it is your eyesight is to hand the camera to a friend and have them try a few test shots at various distances. If they get sharp negs and you don't then it's an eyesight problem. There is also a chance there is something wrong with the 50mm lens,(less likely). I'm sure you can sort out the problem with a few checks and tests. If you have a camera loving friend, especially an old timer, then he or she could check out the camera. Don't reply on prints to diagnose problems, go directly to the negs. I also suppose the mirror or screen could be out of place slightly, but if that is the case then all the shots should show focus problems. </p>

<p>I have a lens that does not quite focus to infinity, it can be easily adjusted it that is the issue</p>

<p>Jessica, I read two issues in your latest post. One is depth of field, the other is infinity focus. In your first example with the cat, the background is properly out-of-focus for a wider aperture setting that was probably used. This is called shallow depth of field, something much desired at times (I hope I'm not being condescending here, but I don't know the extent of your technical knowledge.) Your distance shots are out-of-focus. If you indeed had the lens set to infinity for those, and were holding the camera still enough not to blur them from motion, I'm guessing you have a focus issue with this lens, that could be repaired. I'm guessing that the graininess in the outdoor portrait could be from underexposure - however it could also be from the film and/or developer used. This really gets a bit afield into other questions of technique and materials. If I were in your situation and had the financial means and time, I'd get the camera and lens serviced at a reputable center, check the battery for proper type and performance, and get into some good training in the basics of camera controls, light metering techniques, films and chemistries.</p>

<p>Regarding the failure to focus on infinity, but focus is OK on near subjects, if the lens mount is too far from the film plane, then racking the lens to the infinity stop leaves the lens focus short of infinity. If the problem exists with a single lens, then only the lens could be at fault. Try to find another OM1 and/or other lenses for comparison.</p>

<p>Wow thank you for all of the responses! This is fantastic!</p>

<p>Gerry - I have read a few times about sending your camera and lens off to be checked out, so perhaps when I have some extra cash I'll do that. I found it in a thrift store so I wasn't sure if it even worked at all, but was glad to see that it did. I haven't looked into the Leica's much yet since this camera was an impulse buy, but it has got me interested in looking further into the world of film! I haven't got the cash for an expensive digital cam, and my Panasonic Lumix waterproof/shock proof is my go-to for digital travel since I have broken every other digital camera I have ever owned!</p>

<p>Stephen - I will have to look more into the diopter lens, I never thought of that being an issue before. I will have to see how they turn out on this next roll to tell if it's an eye issue or not, for I tried setting the camera on a flat surface for a couple distance shots just to see if it was a movement issue.</p>

<p>John - I have seen the name John Hermanson a few times now, I checked out his initial prices online, so maybe I will send mine off to him once I get tired enough to let the camera go for such a long period of time (I think the site said 10-12 weeks!). Also next time I am down south I have a couple professional photographer friends that only shoot film, I will probably hand it over and let them snap some shots for me!</p>

<p>Chris - Did you send your lens off to be fixed? Or was it something you adjusted yourself?</p>

<p>Howard - I hardly have any technical knowledge of this stuff whatsoever, I am fresh off the boat. I'm still learning how the camera works and why it does what it does. I am hoping to take a few photography classes so I can get a better understanding of everything. I have so many questions I am always searching online, but sometimes it can be overwhelming!</p>

<p>Thank you all so much for your comments and help!</p>

 

<p>Did I send it off or fix myself? I understand it is an easy five minute job for anyone with basic mechanical skills, which is why I don't want to touch it myself :-)</p>

<p>In my case, I can see in the viewfinder it is not achieving infinity focus, if you focus to infinity and in the viewfinder the split image doesn't line up on a distant object then you know it is out of adjustment. This is how to fix it: http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/861878</p>

<p>You have certainly chosen a great 35mm camera for travelling and backpacking. I go trekking in places like Scotland and the Andes with my OM 1. I carry an Olympus Zuiko 24mm f2.8 for landscape (i.e. wide) shots. This lens has an extremely good reputation which I can confirm. I have 36" x 24" prints on my wall taken with this lens and they look fine (to me at least!). The only other lens I carry is a 50mm f1.4 but your f1.8 will do fine as well. I also carry a small flash gun. Both lenses are fitted with the right lens hood. That's all. A cheaper alternative to the 24mm lens is the 28mm f3.5. It's also a good performer, it's 'wide' but is not quite so 'wide' as the 24mm. As for your infinity focus problem, if you have the standard focussing screen (which you almost certainly will), it has a 'split image' patch dead centre. When the split image coincides, you have focus. If you can't do this while focussing on something at infinity, there's a mechanical problem somewhere. You should send everything away to have it looked at. If the camera and lens are working properly, when the lens focus is turned to infinity (i.e. until it can't be turned anymore) then everything at infinity will be in focus. If not, again there is a mechanical problem and you should have the camera and lens looked at. </p>

<p>THANK YOU Chris & Jim!!</p>

<p>Chris - what if there are no screws on the outside of the barrel of the lens, like on the 50mm 1.8? There are some on the inner silver ring that connects to the body of the camera. The barrel will rotate to what it says infinity, but nothing will line up in the center of the viewfinder, it is always split.</p>

<p>Jessica, I'm going to put forth the idea that your problem is the lens. I once had a lens sent off to be repaired under warranty. It came back with the inability to focus on far-away subjects. Whomever had done the repair, that person did not properly put the lens elements back into their correct position. It is possible in your case that the lens elements were put back incorrectly after a repair or service. You seem to be able to focus properly close up, where critical focus is most necessary. Take your lens in to get looked at by a decent repair service, or perhaps see if there are any OM-mount 50mm Zuikos for sale in your area. That might be cheaper than a repair job. It would be a good idea to see if your zoom lens also has this problem. Make sure you take test shots with it at various distances, including far away.</p>

<p>Sorry to read about your problem. Good luck with getting it resolved.</p>

If you must fiddle with it, the screws you want are under the rubber focussing ring, you need to peel it back to get to them

<p>On the subject of the focusing screen, I received an OM-1 a while back for parts. Something seemed odd and when I took out the focusing screen I noticed it was upside down. This changed the focusing plane enough to mis-focus everything.</p>

<p>The screen had no locating tab so I surmised it had been taken from an OM-10 or other double digit body.</p>

<p>It is very unlikely that you have this problem, but it is possible. I would check the focusing screen before anything else.</p>

<p>-Bill</p>

OK everybody! I found someone local

to look at it and I am laughing my ass

off because it turns out there was a

close-up filter on it the whole time and I

hadn't even noticed. I guess I got a free

one attached to the camera when I

purchased it!

<p>Awesome!</p>

<p>hahaha! that's funny. glad it wasn't serious or expensive!</p>