Thoughts on Olympus OM Bodies...

[Andy Collins]

<p>I've had several OM bodies, starting with an OM-10 and running the gamut from the OM-1, OM-1n, OM-2, OM-2n, and most recently the OM-4. At present I have the OM-1, OM-2n, and the OM-4 (which I'm falling head over heels for!). I enjoy using all of them but most of all the OM-4. I'm wondering what your experiences are with these bodies and if you had your choice of only one, which would it be and why? I've asked this question before but after having had more experience with the OM series, your comments and feedback will be much more relevant now. As nice as they all are, the OM-4 seems to be in a class above the others although I've not used the OM-3 and I've heard that it's the holy grail of OM-bodies. At any rate I love using it and have a feeling that it will get a lot of use. What are your thoughts?</p>

[david_carroll4]

<p>I have an OM-1n (bought used in 1986 - my first OM) and an OM-4T (new in 1993). I had an OM-2n for a while, but it never really lit my fire they way the elegant OM-1 and the simply brilliant OM-4 do. I've never used an OM-3, and while it has some serious OM-phile cachet, I wouldn't swap my OM-4T for one - the "permanently engaged exposure lock" multispot metering system of the OM-4 makes a dedicated manual mode almost superfluous, and while the OM-3 has a battery-independent mechanical shutter, a meterless OM-3 is, in the end, a very nice compact manual SLR, like many others, so the battery independence is of little real importance, IMO. The combination of compact size, build quality, weatherproofing, the viewfinder, the unique and beautifully designed metering system and the full system support of Zuiko lenses, OTF flashes and macro make the OM-4T arguably the finest manual focus 35mm SLR ever made, IMO. It shares top billing with the Nikon F3HP as my favorite ever SLR. I tarted up my OMs with bright 2-13 LumiMicron screens and super grippy GripTac leatherette, and use Zuiko primes (28/2.8, 35/2.8, 50/1.4, 50/3.5, 85/2.0, 200/4.0) - I don't like the weight of a zoom hanging off the front of these small bodies, although I have a beautiful 35-70/3.6 that I can't bring myself to sell.</p>

[djphoto]

<p>I still consider the OM2n one of my all-time best cameras, even though I haven't owned one since 1992.</p>

[tom_cheshire]

<p>I've had a lot of OMs and the only thing I found quirky about them is some of them drain the battery and the film advance lever sometimes goes mushy in feeling. The solution, of course, is to use the battery operated winder so the lever spring doesn't wear out. </p>

<p>Aside from that the nicer OMs are the OM-2S Program. Of the lesser OMs the OM-G is the best. Others may like the OM-PC but it is not for me. </p>

<p>And never leave your OM up-side-down for a while or the meter needle will stay pointing up (easily cured by leaving the meter on with the lenscap on and sitting right-side-up for a few hours. </p>

[kellymjones]

<p >It would be an easy choice for me. The OM-4 for sure. The second choice for a body would be a much more difficult decision between the OM-1, OM-2n, and OM-2s. I love them all. Alas, I've never used an OM-3.</p>

<p >The main reason for choosing the OM-4 is the nearly perfect spot metering system. The only rival spot metering system that comes close is the Canon T90. However, for me at least, the OM-4 metering system is easier to use without taking my eye from the viewfinder. Combine that strength with the usual small OM body and small lenses and you have a great picture taking machine.</p>

 

[sw12dz]

<p>At present I have several Olympus OM (single digit series) cameras. I enjoy using all of them, but if I had to choose only one, then I would pick the OM-4Ti. It shares the same fantastic metering system as the OM-3, but when coupled with the Olympus F280 flash, you've got flash sync at any shutter speed. The OM-1, OM-2 and OM-3 only sync at 1/60th. Both the OM-3 and OM-4 series are equipped with the adjustable diopter which is a plus for me.</p>

[luis_g]

<p>I still own OM-1ns, OM-2, OM-2n, & OM-3. If I could only have one body, it would definitely be an OM-1n.</p>

<p> </p>

[ingemar_lampa1]

<p>I started with an OM-10, then traded up to an OM-3 (first series) in 1986. Except a few CLA's (Last one in 1996, then stored until 2009) it has never missed a beat. Doesn't seem to drain the batteries either, they usually last for a couple of months, but maybe I just got lucky.</p>

<p>Just came back from a trip where it was used quite a lot, even in sub-zero temperatures. I really love it to bits.</p>

<p>The only "negative" point I would have is that the body is so small that one has to excercise caution with the shutter button, or shake will result. I hope it will never pack up on me!</p>

<p>Regret not getting an OM-3Ti when they were available...</p>

[machts gut]

<p>I'm waiting for my second OM-1n to return from it's CLA. I like the compactness of the body and the lenses and after getting used to it, the shutter ring around the bayonett. The removable flash shoe makes the body even more beautiful. The camera is also one of the most quite SLRs I know. I own some primes and the 3.6/35-70, which is incredible sharp. I daresay perhaps even better than the 2.8/35. But like David I hardly ever use it because it's so bulky on the little camera.</p>

[john_robison3]

<p>I still perfer the OM-1 or 1n. Never had a OM-4 but have an OM-2sp and it's a battery eater but I've fashoned a grip that holds 2 AAA batteries and feeds the camera the 3V it needs to operate. A set of AAA batteries last about 3 or 4 years. I really don't like the the 2sp wind on, it is not near as smooth as the OM-1 and OM-2. All my OM's have the 1-10 plain matte w/grid screen. Never have liked focusing aids, too distracting. I finally found the 200mm f5 Zuiko I wanted, for $35! This gives me coverage from 24mm to 200mm in a set of 5 compact primes that all use the same 49mm filter size.</p>

[User_502260]

<p>I don't have any of the traditional OM bodies. My collection includes three OM10s, an OMPC and an OM2000. The OM2000 feels like the other Cosina-made cameras I have. I first got an Olympus body because I saw interesting lenses in OM mount selling for very little. If I can remember all of my Zuikos I have a 28/3.5 black front, 35/2.8 black front, two 50/1.8 MIJ and two other 50/1.8s, a 50/3.5, a 100/2.8, a 135/3.5 and a 200/4. My favorites are the 50/3.5 and the 100/2.8. They are both small and very sharp. I would like to get at least one body with interchangeable focusing screens so I can use it with extension tubes and with the Auto Bellows. Even the inexpensive OM10 is a pleasant camera to use. It has a bright viewfinder, a quiet shutter and is easy on batteries. I would not enjoy using the OM10 as much if I didn't have a Manual Adapter or two to go with them. Some of the non-Zuikos I like using on the Olympus bodies include the 24/2.8 Vivitar TX, 28/2 Soligor C/D, 55/2.8 Vivitar Macro, 90/2.5 Tamron SP Macro (2nd version), 135/2.8 Vivitar Close Focusing, 28-85/2.8-3.8 Vivitar Auto Variable Focusing, 28-90/2.8-3.5 Vivitar Series 1 and 75-205/3.8 Vivitar 2 touch. </p>

[luis_g]

<p>I owned two OM PCs and while they felt cheap compared to my other OM-X/XX bodies, they did well for me.</p>

[david_carroll4]

I dismantled a couple of OM-40s (OM-PC) before, and while it is a "consumer" model compared with the single digit OMs, it was

still a solid metal body with a proper glass pentaprism. Would that current consumer cameras were as well made.

[jim_baker6]

<p>No doubt the OM 4 (or OM 4Ti) is one of the finest manual SLR cameras ever made mainly because of the superb multi spot-metering system. You just can't go wrong with it. It's so intuitive! The OM 1n is simple to use. It's a design classic and that adds to the enjoyment. The OM2000 deserves a mention. It's nothing like as stylish as an OM 1n but if you just consider the technical specification it's quite impressive: 1/125 flash synchronisation, spot metering and mirror-and-aperture prefire in 'timer mode'. It's very lightweight too. If you are backpacking and are photographing landscapes (i.e. are using a tripod), the last two are significant advantages. If only the stylishness and build quality of the OM 1n could have been combined with the technical specification of the OM2000! I'm not too keen on the OM 3's because of the lack of a timer. </p>

[Andy Collins]

<p>This is great information! There's something about the OM-4 that really <em>does</em> feel intuitive, but the others are also a pleasure to use. My OM-2n is a black model in near-mint condition and works beautifully, but I've heard people express concern over the electronics in this particular model. All in all though, my OM experience has been a great one, and that includes the OM-10, a very nice camera.</p>

[tony_lockerbie]

<p>Hi Andy, I've just recently come to the Olympus cameras, and I have an OM1n and an OM2n. I always used to think that they would be a bit "precious" because of the lightness of their build, but history has proved me wrong here as there are plenty of them still working well.<br>

They do handle really well though, and the viewfinder is excellent, must have been a revelation in it's day. I bought a motor drive for my OM1, but quickly took it off again because it just spoilt the whole experience of using the camera. I haven't tried the OM3 or 4 yet, prices are still sky high for both (particularly the 3) here in Australia, but I imagine they would be a very good thing.<br>

Some consider the Zuiko lenses to be a little inferior to Canon or Nikon, may or may not be true, mine seem excellent, although the 50mm 1.4 is softer wide open than my Canon or Nikon counterparts. The 50mm 1.8 is a cracker though</p>

[Andy Collins]

<p>Tony, I have heard both sides regarding the Zuikos, but recently on fredmiranda.com, I read a very lengthy thread about using Zuikos on current DSLRs. There are apparently a lot of people who have gotten adapters to mount Zuikos on their 5DIIs and 1DsII/III bodies. You should see the quality of pictures they've created. There doesn't seem to be anything inferior from seeing their pics! I think they're excellent. The bodies do in fact handle wonderfully in spite of (or maybe <em>because</em> of...) their compact size.</p>

[steve_levine]

<p>The OM cameras were "the better mousetrap" in the 1970's. They were lighter, smaller, and in many cases did a better job than cameras that seemed twice their size and weight. Most of the common Zuiko lenses were as good or better than their Nikon, Canon or Minolta counterparts too. And who doesn't love those viewfinders?</p>

<p>Unfortunately the cloth shutters did not stand up to hard PJ or other high volume use. And rumors of this had PJ's selling them off by the bushel basket at one point. The truth is how many people actually would shoot 5-10K frames in a year? Because that was basically what it took to "break" an OM shutter.</p>

<p> </p>

[Mike Gammill]

<p>Yeah, I sold my OM-2S. Currently I have the OM-1 and an OMG. </p>

[mark f]

<p>I still use the OM1MD I bought used in high school in 1977! I can't imagine a better camera to use....tiny and intuitive. Although, and OM4T is certainly tempting as I use spot metering with all my non-35mm work. </p>

[ralf_j.]

<p>Sorry Andy no experience in using them, although they feel nice. Still have a brand new OM1, but not to keen on using it.</p>

[chrisnielsen]

<p>The only camera I ever regret selling was my OM10. So I gave in and bought an OM2N, currently in the postal service enroute to me from zuiko.com</p>

[luis_g]

<p>The OMs were a revelation. I bought my first OM-1 while I was using Nikon F2s and some Fs, and was blown away by the lightness, size and low polar moment of the tiny lenses (which is also one of the ergonomic strengths of the Leicas with Summicrons, and M-series Pentaxes. I continued to use the Nikons for commercial work, but used the OMs for my own. The metering systems are of little relevance to me, as I use an incident light meter almost all the time.</p>

<p> </p>

[jim_baker6]

<p>Les: thanks for the info about the timer accessory. A timer is essential once you climb that peak want to get in the photo 'to prove you didi it'!...but the other reason for a self timer is that when you activate it, in the case of the OM 4 and the OM2000 (and the OM 2SP, I think), the aperture is set and mirror locks up immediately. Only the shutter fires at the end of the timer cycle. I've found that to be sure of getting the very best from Zuiko lenses, particularly the long lenses (i.e. not have vibration limit the lens performance) you need a tripod and aperture-and-mirror prefire. Even with this, vibration (from just the shutter) tends to limit performance of the longer lenses (I have a Zuiko 135 (f3.5), 200(f4) and 300mm) unless the shutter speed is at least 1/250 sec. To test the limits of the lenses I had to be looking at e.g. lettering 0.1mm high on the negative. To compare like-with-like, the lettering on the negative is always 0.1mm high meaning that the longer the lens, the greater the camera-subject distance. With the OM 1n you only get mirror lock up, which is still worth having. I hasten to add that in normal use (i.e. hand-held) you can take perfectly fine photos. I use my Zuiko 24 (f2.8), 50(f1.8) and 85mm around f8 with a shutter speed >= 1/60 at the results are as good as you are going to get, which is superb. </p>

[wblynch]

<p>I have had an OM-1 since 1975. I took that camera 2/3 around the world using mostly a 28/2.8 and 50/1.4. It finally got green gunk on the prism and in 1998 I found a pristine OM1n (also black) to 'replace' it.</p>

<p>I've since had 5 OM10's (3 given away to relatives and friends) and 3 more OM1's.</p>

<p>Just a few weeks ago I got my first OM4t. It arrived in near mint condition along with another 28/2.8 and the 35-105 zoom. Being mostly a wide-angle person and preferring primes, I was surprised to find I enjoyed shooting the 35-105. We'll see how it did when I get my Ektachromes back tomorrow.</p>

<p>Olympus OM are the only film slr I've ever had.</p>