jim_covill

<p>I had a similar issue with my 2S some years back. I greased the shutter ring with a silicon lubricant (use just a dab and rotate the shutter ring a few times to work the lubricant into the teeth).<br /> The light meter difference is because you've got a mechanical misalignment between the shutter ring and the internal location. Easy fix - just remove the shutter ring again and reinstall it with the correct shutter speed at the top (it's a bit trial and error but you'll get there).</p>

<p>For mostly B & W printing, condenser head enlargers may be a better solution than colour oriented diffuser heads. The reason is contrast.<br>

I've owned both Durst and Omega enlargers with dual heads. For B & W portraiture oriented prints I'd generally use the diffuser head to get a 'softer' image. As far as lenses get an 80mm for MF film, 50mm for 35mm film. Get a high end enlarger lens (El-Nikkor, Schneider Componon-S, etc). If you're using a 'blad 500 series, spring for the very very best enlarging lens money can buy. If you require big printing making, make sure you have an extended length column.</p>

<p>When I first went dSLR in a big way I opted Nikon (from a 35mm system of 5 OM bodies and some 17 lenses). So now I have a lot of 'gold ring' Nikon glass and some D300 bodies (my earlier Nikon bodies broke but they did serve me well) and it's big and heavy stuff.<br>

And guess what, I've just bought a OM-D E5 and love it. Small, lightweight and hence easy to carry, it works well, very well.<br>

Camera gear is meant to be used (at least in my books) and I'd like to think my OM-D will see plenty of hard use before it dies.</p>

 

Lots to digest - thank you all for contributing.

 

I have been eyeing the Nikon DX 17-55mm f2.8G for some time - at least ever since buying the 12-24mm. More than anything its size and weight concern me. I live in Nova Scotia where anything this esoteric I have to buy sight unseen (and ordered from away - NS slang).

 

Given the comments, I am beginning to wonder if my 18-70 has taken a little too much abuse or was perhaps a tad soft to begin with. I was perfectly happy with it until I fell in lust with 12-24. At a cost of 1/4 of the DX 17-55mm I'm beginning to think I'll just order another one and take my chances.

 

Cheers

 

Jim

I was a dedicated OM user for nearly 25 years (OM1, 1n, 2, 2Sp) and own many Zuiko Optics but felt abandoned when the OM 3 and 4 were priced simply too much for me to justify. Not to mention the unreliability of same. Then the optics started getting overly priced and very limited in selection.

 

Honestly I jumped ship - fool me once shame on you - and well I don't fooled a second time often. I figure OM will once again drop the ball and bail prematurely.

 

For what it's worth I opted for Nikon. IMHO if you want leading bleeding edge go Canon but if you want done right wait for Nikon (and pay a very slight premium).

 

Jim

The OM1 has a 'bulb' setting which you use with a cable release that locks. The lock mechanisms are often a screw that clamps the cable, or a plunger style on more elaborate units.

 

You should be aware of the reciprocity law as it applies the film you're using to assist you in your bracketing. Esentially at slow (or very high) exposure the film does not act linearly (i.e. twice as much light does not necessarily mean 1 stop over exposure).

 

Jim

Certainly the OM2S film advance is a different feel from the more silkier OM1 and 2 bodies but I certainly wouldn't say it's stiff and jerky. It does offer more resistance at the point in its movement where the arm crosses over the film counter window but nothing I would consider even faintly disturbing.

 

The OM motor drives run an OM2S at 3.5 fps as opposed to 5 fps on the OM1/2 because as noted earlier the double mirror action (and slap) are slower.

 

Jim

I own the 35f2, 50f1.4, 50f1.8(mij), and a 55f1.2(single coated). The 55's a pig in terms of size/weight but I really like the viewfinder brightness. That said, the 50f1.4 is a pretty good overall lens and offers good camera balance. The 35f2 a bit something - the images don't jump at you.

 

At the risk of playing the devils advocate, the very rare and very expensive 40mm pancake lens has the repuation as a excellent lens.

I have shot colour slide and black/white almost exclusively the past 25 years and, believe me, slide film is most unforgiving. Negative films tend to have very dynamic exposure ranges (+/- 7 stops), slide film on the other hand has a range of approx +/- 2 stops (and even that might be generous). Remember a 100ASA/ISO slide film is a just that, a 100 slide film. What you have to learn to do better is second guess your camera's exposure meter. An (averaging) camera meter can be biased by lots of dark (or light) surfaces in a shot relative to a mid range subject and will over (under)expose.

 

Initially bracket the shot (i.e. as suggested by the meter, then 1 stop over, 1 stop under). You can then compare the 3 (or 5...) slides to get a handle on the tricks of exposure relative to the scenes taken.

 

It is really the best way to learn the ins and outs of exposure.

 

Then you can move on the Zone system!

The OM10 doesn't have the additional flash cord connection - just the hotshoe. It was targetted more towards a "consumer" market and there were a few comprimes made - no interchangable focussing screen, the lens mount was made of a different material - less rugged, and the manual adaptor was originally an option also no off-the-film flash among others.

While not an OM1to4, it wasn't a bad little camera for the money. However for macro photography (and maybe a ringlight) it's not a great choice (look for an OM2, or OM4 with supports OTF flash exposure [not all support PC/X cords] - you'll also want a T32 flash [maybe the smaller T20, or the massive T45])

 

That said, a flash can be a real curse for photographing around reflecting surfaces. Google fish photography and you'll see there are plenty of ways to produce superior images without using a flash.

 

For what it's worth - years and years ago there used to be a hotshoe to flash cord adaptor/converter sold. But ... I expect you'll find it's far far easier to pick up a used flash (5 to 10 dollars)that mounts via the hotshoe.

I think it's fair to say that, all things being equal, zoom lenses do not produce the same image quality as prime lenses. The following link shows quite a few tests for quite a few Zuiko lenses including the 100f2.8, 135f2.8 and the 75-150f4.

 

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

 

It can pay to be pragmatic and although I personally own both the 100f2.8 and 135f2.8, believe your lens will serve you most admirably. From what I remember it's a two ring zoom that's compact and lightweight.

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 had a similar problem with my OM2S(p) which is similar in construction to OM4. It happened very suddenly and was very noticable relative to my 2 OM1s and an OM2.

 

Anyway it's quite an easy fix if your comfortable with your hands. It involves no body stripdown and makes for a good first repair.

 

1) Loosen the 3 screws holding the lens mount to the body (using a high quality screw driver that is not undersized).

 

2) Note the shutter speed alignment (important) then lift it away from the body.

 

3) On the OM2S there is an inner plastic ring that couples the shutter ring to a partially visible gear at the front of the mirror box.

 

4) Clean the shutter ring and external camera body surfaces that the ring rotates about with isopropyl alcohol (use electronic style Qtips i.e. not cotton ones) and let airdry.

 

5) Use a light silicon lubricant (not a grease) and if you get the spray type DON'T spray it on - put a little in a saucer and apply via another QTIP).

 

6) Now reassemble - first the inner ring, then the shutter ring, and finally the lens mount.

 

7) Check the manual speed (B, 1 sec and 1/2 sec)to see if you got the alignment correct.

 

8) If not DON'T PANIC. Take the lens mount back off and relocate the shutter ring - at this point it's a little trial and error but relax and enjoy the moment.

 

So in closing - use a high quality correctly sized Philips Screwdriver - you don't want to trash the screw heads. Note the shutter speed setting when you take it apart. Use a silicon lubricant. Take your time.

 

Jim