What's so special about the OM-1?

A family friend who hasn't taken pictures in years recently gave me

her virtually unused OM-1 with a 35mm Zuiko lens. I know little about

SLR's, but have seen that the OM-1 appears to be a much loved little

camera. In fact, it seems to be more appreciated than any of the

subsequent Olympus film SLR's. I've also noticed that they are quite

inexpensive compared to the other OM models. The OM-1 doesn't appear

particularly impressive in terms of build quality. I'm sure the Zuiko

lenses are nice, but I haven't heard of them being better that the

Nikon lenses, much less the Zeiss lenses of the same era. So I

thought I'd ask you all, what's so special about the OM-1?

For one thing, extremely compact for a 35mm SLR system camera.

Big, bright viewfinder. Quiet. Has mirror lockup, whereas many others in the class did not. Not battery dependent.

 

Ray

The camera was first released as the M-1; the Leica crowd got abit upset. This camera was real small; and started a downsizing and brightness increase in slr's. Before the OM-1 magazines hated the shutter speed dial around teh lens mount on the Nikkormat; it became "OK" when the OM-1 used this.

The 50mm F1.8 is a gem of an lens. The Olympus crew has had a long history of small cameras; before the OM-1 was the famous Pen 1/2 frame series of cameras.

The Olympus M added a damper on the mirror; to dampen the vibration.

Kelly-

 

Do you or anyone else know anything about the 50mm f/1.2 lens for the OM cameras?

Apart from what everyone else has already said, the OM1 is a camera that manages to generate an undefinable feeling of "oneness" between itself and the photographer -if you know what I mean.

compact

 

quiet soft cloth shutter

 

high mag and high coverage bright viewfinder

 

21mm f2.0

 

not too tough but damn sexy ala leica

Nothing.

 

It was the only OM available when the OM system was the latest must-have toy.

 

Yes, the 21/2 is a killer lens but your question was about a particular camera body rather than the system,

For those who replied that the OM-1 had a quiet shutter: IMHO it isn't that quiet. It's louder than a Nikon F. It isn't that noisy, either, however.

 

The OM-1 is a fiddly little camera, with a PITA mirror lock-up lever and tacky-feeling controls. Still, at least it *had* a MLU feature.

 

I'd like to see a small digital back for the OM cameras. It's a great system, but not worth putting up with film for. :-P However the viewfinder is very generous and it would make a good system for travelling.

Marc, you're treading on holy ground by asking this question. ;>

 

I've used many camera systems - Miranda, Pentax threadmount and K-mount, Minolta, Canon, Olympus and now my primary system is Nikon manual focus gear.

 

While I consider my Nikon stuff my workhorse gear for serious assignments, I enjoy the little OM-1 and prefer taking it and a couple of diminutive Zuikos for most outings. I have a bunged up neck, back, hip, knee and ankle on the right side from a car wreck and the difference of a few ounces really matters at the end of a long day.

 

I also appreciate the no-frills approach. It's utilitarian but has its own personality, albeit a quirky one. Take, for example, placing the shutter speed ring around the lens mount and the ISO dial where the shutter speed knob usually goes. And the proximity of the mirror lockup and film release controls.

 

Still, it's an excellent camera, durable and reliable. It was used by at least a few National Geographic photographers, among others.

 

For a while its flash sophistication was second to none. Now, tho', the bits necessary for a full flash kit are difficult to find. And the detachable hotshoe for the OM-1 and OM-2 series always was junk.

 

Likewise the Zuiko macro and microphotography system was among the best (Olympus got its start making microscopes).

 

Another place where some OM's shine is in metering sophistication. For a while nothing else could touch the sophistication of the off-the-film metering of the OM-2 series and OM-4's. The AE mode on my Nikon F3HP seems brain dead in comparison.

 

Then there's the vaunted bokeh of the better Zuiko lenses - that magical, mystical, ill-defined quality that imparts the gentle, gradual rendering of the out-of-focus areas in a photo. I can see it, especially when compared with the occasionally harsh bokeh of my Nikkors. Some say they see no difference.

 

Some Zuikos tested no better than other brands on the bench. At least a couple, tho', were considered equal to anything made by any company, specifically the 50/2 and 90/2 macros and the 35-80/2.8 zoom. Before dropping it and locking up the auto-diaphragm, my modest Zuiko 50/1.8 was as good as any lens I've ever used.

 

Finally, the OM-1 and OM-1N are likeliest to remain repairable for the longest time, even after parts for the more electronically oriented OM's have dried up.

Ordinarily I would not prefer an OM-1 over a later model for reliability, for the simple reason that they are much older. This doesn't affect you, of course.

 

There is no denying the OM-1 is prettier than the Apollo-esque OM-4.

 

Spare parts availability may vary between countries. For example, Australia had 55% sales tax on cameras during the OM-1's life (now 10%) so there are relatively more newer models here than in some other places.

I started off with a broken OM10 from a charity shop, which I fixed. I was so impressed, that I just can't seem to walk on by when I see an OM for sale. My favorite, and my workhorse, is the OM2n. I reiterate Lex's comments about the 50/f1.8 - Magic!

I'd love one someday. Read great stories about the 24/2.0, too. You could do worse than visiting that very well known Malaysian site: http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/olympusom1n2/

All of the above, plus (among the single-digit series):

 

Common finder screen interface among all models

 

Common motor interface among all models

 

Common back interface among all models

 

Common lens interface among all models (including Program and TTL flash functions)

 

Change shutter speeds without removing the camera from your eye and taking your hand off the shutter release

 

The camera still works if you fold the wind lever out of the way of your face

 

The meter doesn't turn itself off after 30 seconds

 

Control focus, aperture and shutter speed all with one hand, easily and quickly

 

Smooth, slick, effortless winding and rewinding compared to Nikon, Canon or Pentax (similar to Minolta SRT)

 

It's so PRETTY......

 

And, I don't know about Your OM1 and Your Nikon F, but all 6 of my OM's are MUCH quieter than all 3 of my Nikon F's.

 

:)=

With the OM1, Olympus fired the first shot and started the 35mm SLR revolution in the mid 70s. It had most of the features of the Nikon F(2) and Canon F1 in a much smaller and lighter body (and system for that matter)- inter-changeable focusing screens (without the removable pentaprism), motor drives/auto winder. When all is said and done, the Zuiko optics were just as good as any other Japanese camera company - every company had a 'best of class' lens, the Canon 50f1.4, the Nikon 105, Zuiko 180f2.8 etc but overall all the companies were in the same league - they had to be. And with launch of the OM1, along came the smaller and lighter Nikons, Canons, Pentaxes ...

 

The OM2 with its automatic/off-the-film plane metering (including flash) started another revolution.

 

I own 5 OM bodies and while my first was an OM1n I must admit my favorite is the electronic OM2 - handles just like an OM1 but has a significantly better metering system.

 

Lenses - well I do like my 35mmf2 and 55f1.2 but they do throw the camera balance off so I too have become sold on my 'made in Japan' 50f1.8.

<i>"Do you or anyone else know anything about the 50mm f/1.2 lens for the OM cameras?"</i>

<p>

Marc, I have the 50mm f/1.2 lens (as opposed to the original 55mm f/1.2 lens). It is quite a good lens for it's size (takes 49mm filters!!), it is a little soft wide open but what else can be expected? I'm happy enough with mine...<div></div>

Is the OM1 quieter than an OM2 or OM4?

the OM2/OM2N is as quiet as the OM1; the later models, though, have a double mirror which makes them noisier and not as pleasant sounding. they are still probably on the quiet side for an SLR though.

Marc,

 

I don't know what you mean by "doesn't appear particularly impressive in terms of build quality." Their small size and rugged simplicity is what endeared them to many people. They're a simple, mechanical body, and they were built quite well and should last for 50 more years since there's lots of parts around for it.

 

Others here have filled you in on most of the details quite well. If you don't have use for it, let me know and I'll take it off your hands (buy it).

The OM2/OM2N is as quiet as the OM1. Richard Oleson thanks for the info.

My OM2SP is remarkably smooth and quiet. I've always prized that in an SLR. I saw a

Modern Photography stripdown test of this model, and it scored at the bottom of the scale

for noise and vibration among all SLRs tested. Perhaps the double mirror tends to prolong

the mirror slap's kinetics, or even cancel out some of the impacts? My Contax 139 is like a

mousetrap by comparison -- but a precision mousetrap, of course. The Contax's tactile

payoff comes after the shutter fires, when you wind it. It's like the best of ball bearings

and butter...

the winding feel also changed dramatically after the -N series. The OM1/2/1N/2N have a silky, effortless wind that is lacking in the 2S and up models. I think they gained some ruggedness in this exchange, but I have never found the earlier models to be particularly fragile.

 

:)=

I seem to recall John Hermanson mentioning on the OM mailing list a few years ago something about Olympus changing a part from plastic to metal. Dunno if that would have anything to do with film advance feel. Leicaphiles talk about the differences in feel between the models with some brass and those with all steel gearing.

 

I think the main reason my OM-1 film advance doesn't feel particularly smooth is because the camera has never been CLA'd. That fact that it still works so well is a testament to its quality.