Bought an OM-2; your advice and experience wanted

[jim_a]

I've been thinking about picking up an SLR again to compliment my

Leica M equipment. I've handled a few OM's over the years and

appreciated their small size. Many have called them the Leica M's of

the SLR world. Over the years I've owned or used Nikons: F, F2, FM, F3

, N2000, N8008 and F4 at one time or another. They are all long sold

or given away. After using the Leicas for so long the Nikons have no

appeal to me. Been there. Done that. It would be like remarrying an

ex-wife. I've handled Canons and they also don't seem quite right to

me. But there is that siren song... It goes all the way back to when I

was a teenager. It's Olympus. At one point I looked into the OM system

but all the pros used Nikon. Mind you that was back in the day before

Nikon FUBAR'd everything, every newspaper in America shot Nikon, and

only oddballs used Canons.

 

A few days ago I noticed an OM-2 on Ebay with a 50/1.8 lens. It comes

with a 90-day warranty and both the camera and lens had been

professionally overhauled. The price, thanks to the movement to

digital by the masses, was peanuts, so I made my bid and walked away

to let fate take its course. After coming home from seeing a movie I

discovered that I now own an OM-2 and a slice of photographic history.

 

The 50 is as long as I go these days. The 35 on the M is my main lens.

I was thinking about picking up the 28/2.8 Zuiko. I've found a few

posts about this lens and read a Zuiko lens test site that gave this

lens high marks. What do you Zuikophiles have to say about the 28/2.8?

I would also like to pick up the 1-5 screen as I've never been a fan

of the split image screens. Does anyone out there have any likes or

dislikes towards the 35/2.8? I value the smaller size over the faster,

bigger lenses.

 

If you have any advice to offer on the road I'm about to take I'd like

to hear it.

[jamie_costello]

Jim wrote: " ... If you have any advice to offer on the road I'm about to take I'd like to hear it".

 

Plain and simple - you need more stuff ;-). You have an OM-2. You now need to have a 2n and 2s. The 2n just looks so darned cool (uses the T-series TTL flash system, too) and the 2s has real spot metering, Series-2 focusing screen capability and a separate TTL port for off-camera flash.

 

Both the 35/2.8 and 28/2.8 ave good reps. Personally, if I go wide, I go to 21 and 24, but that's just a personal choice. I use a 35/2 for small groups.

 

Check out either KEH (www.keh.com) or oBoy for the screens. I don't see 1-5s come up that often, though.

[carlos_borges]

Hello Jim

Like you, I�ve been using Leica M�s and LTM�s for years now, but somehow I miss the beautiful looking of defocus image through the viewfinder of an SLR system. This really helps me to preview what is going to be recorded on film. I�ve owned an R7 with a couple of prime lens an 35-70 f:4, but I decide to sell the all thing after realise that I can�t see the infinity image focus on the viewfinder, witch is unacceptable for a system the price of Leica. I recently brought an OM-2n with a 50mm f:1.4 lens. What a joy to find a very small and quiet camera (like the M�s), cheap (unlike the M�s) and with an excellent quality lens and big viewfinder (97%). I now have a 28mm f:2.8, 135mm f:3.5 and a 35-70 f:4 (surprisingly excellent) for the price of the R body. I did a few test rolls with it and until a magnification of 10X, I don�t find any usable difference in definition between those Olympus lens and the R�s. As for the 28mm, like the others lens, is excellent from wide open. Fantastic at middle scale. The OM-2n meter works flawlessly. Just miss the spot meter, but�. I hate the film advance and shutter noise of the OM-2 Spot-Program. Love this little, compact, cheap and simple system.

Hope this helps your decisions. Regards.

[preston_merchant]

It's hard to live without a spot meter, so I'd vote for the OM2-SP. The 28/2.8 is my favorite lens, about which I have no complaints. I have a 35/2.8 and consider it unacceptably soft at most apertures (and I'm not a sharpness junkie). I'll probably get another one, to try another sample, hoping for an improvement. I can't believe there would be that much difference between the 28 and 35. My 28 is so good. Surely I just have a bum 35.

[mark_bouquet1]

The 1-5 screen is a clear field with a microprism for focusing. You can't preview the depth of field with it. It's also brighter than the standard screen, so you would have to have the manual meter adjusted to accomodate that. TTL auto-exposure would still work correctly though.

[douglas_green1]

I'd also suggest a macro lens, since that's something you can't do with Leicas. Personally, I'm a big fan of the Tamron 90mm f2.5 SP - the early version with 49mm filter thread, same as most Zuikos.

 

And the 28mm f2.8 Zuiko is my favorite lens for the Olympus.

[ecarter]

Congratulations on getting a great little camera. The OM-2 is a wonderful workhorse.

 

I don't know about the 35mm 2.8 zuiko - I've heard it's not a very sharp lens, but I can't speak from experience. Even so, I think you'd be better served with the 28mm 2.8, which is a great little lens - you should be very happy with it.

 

As far as getting the screen, they occasionally turn up on auction sites (come on, we all know where by now) - a more sure bet though is to stroll to http://www.zuiko.com/ - Camtech I believe carries them and some other 3rd party focus screens, may be worth checking out. Last I heard, they do have the 1-5 screen you're looking for and the prices are reasonable. They also can still service and CLA OM cameras nicely.

 

Personally, I have a OM-2s, and this is a great camera as well... though to be honest, all the single digit OM bodies are winners. :-)

 

Enjoy.

[r s]

Congratulations on getting a very nice camera.

We have an OM-2n in our household and it's such a joy to use - and to look at for that matter. A stunning design both technically as well as in apperance.

 

There's also a bunch of great literature out there on the OM system that you may want to check out before you dive into any further lens decisions.

 

A great site for some of the OM cameras as well as their lenses is: http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/olympusom1n2/index.htm

[kieran_hamill]

Another benefit of the old OM2 is it doesn't automagically sync to 1/60th when using TTL flash. Later models all sync to 1/60th when the flash is detected, regardless of the ambient lighting, supposedly to avoid wasted shots when the wrong sync speed is set. If the flash output on the OM2 is insufficient it just keeps on exposing OTF. That is a much better system IMO.

[neild]

Kieran, do you know of any way to 'modify' the OM-2n to give the same behaviour as the OM-2, ie. <i>"If the flash output on the OM2 is insufficient it just keeps on exposing OTF"</i>? For instance, covering up one of the contacts perhaps? I agree that it would be a better system when used deliberately.<br>

I believe Olympus developed the 'forced 1/60' behaviour of the OM-2n with a flash to prevent accidental battery drain.

[mark_bouquet1]

I think it's debatable whether the OM-2 has a better flash synch system than the OM-2n. While in certain circumstances the OM-2n might yield an overall underexposure, the OM-2 might cause the photograph to be ruined by camera shake if the camera's not on a tripod. Anyway, the OM-2n's automatic switch to 1/60 sec. is easily overidden by using a non-dedicated flash.

[kieran_hamill]

Neil,

I can't remember where I read the taping up contacts trick, but seem to remember I managed to identify the right contact (OM40), but the result was the flash only fired at full power - ie no TTL - so it was pointless.

 

Mark,

My opinion is that if the ambient reading dictated a tripod was needed I would use one. The old OM2 allows you to play with flash painting etc. The current situation tends toward overexposed subjects in underexposed locations - which I hate. The most flexible (and accurate) flash method is still to have a manual flash with variable output so that it is not dictating your aperture, and a good flash meter which indicates ambient/flash ratios, but you can forget about spontinaity. OM TTL flash is OK for bouncing in light rooms and macro, but I don't like the results anywhere else, which are hard to predict.

 

The only OM system which seems to come close to the flexibility I want is the OM3Ti with F280 because I understand the compensation dial adjusts the flash output reading TTL while the shutter speed and aperture are set manually. I have no experience of using it though.

[guyvickers]

Hi Jim

 

I can empathise with your situation. I have 18mm, 24mmf2, 35mm f2.8, 50mm 1.4 and many lenses above, which you say are not impt to you. The 35mm f2.8 that I have is not multi-coated, but is very consistently sharp from f4-f11. I have sold calendar cover shots with this lens, with polariser (I used mirror lock-up and aperture pre-fire, i.e self timer on OM4Ti). The multi-coated 35mm 2.8 does not get as good a review with the tests done here:

 

http://members.aol.com/olympusom/lenstests/default.htm

 

But of course individual samples vary. I have used and really liked the multi-coated 35mm f2.0, it is as sharp as my 35 2.8 and has less vignetting, also better contrast. If the small amount of extra weight is not too much bother then the MC 35 /2 is a great choice and if you come across two, let me know!

 

Times are changing with olympus, the price of parts is going up 200-500 %, people are getting rid of a lot of old non-multi-coated lenses and its a case of Buyer Beware. Some of the earlier lenses were not that good and knowing how to read the text on front element is important, e.g "G-Zuikos" are not likely to be multi-coated, whereas just plain "Zuiko" are more likely to be multicoated. The inscription "MC" on front of lens guarentees multi-coating, and some without MC are definitely multi-coated, if the lens reflects green in its front element. Few!

 

Multi -coating is not so impt with print film, but this has taught us that there is a range of qualties out there, the multi-coated lenses generally are sharper and have better contrast. Over investing in olympus could lead to problems in a few yrs time, when repairs are not possible.

 

So my advice is to get lenses with MC on front, that way you know you are getting a multi-coated, likely-to-be-high-quality optic! However my 24mm f2 reflects green is therefore multi coated and has neither G before the zuiko or the letters MC. It is therefor a very new multi coated lens with improved optical formula, for it sure delivers. (The "MC" was only stamped on lenses for about a decade from 1980).

 

There is then the silver ring at front of lens issue, generally earlier lenses had a silver, etched-to-the-metal ring just above thread on front, commonly called "Silver nose", these lenses are generally not the best Olympus produced and are not often multi-coated.

 

Cheers

Guy