machts gut

<p>I can't help with your question, but would suggest you could buy a film and shoot some pics in memory of your father.</p>

<p>Compared to a Leica R8 I'd consider it small. Compared to a Leica III it's big.</p>

<p>Good enlarger. I use mine for more than 20 years now. Did try some others but still stick to mine. I would only upgrade to a Magnifax 4, if I got one for a reasonable price. I mainly use it with the color head 3.<br> Living in germany, where you get them for cheap on ebay, I think the price is too high, but I can't tell about your part of the world.</p>

<p>Thanks Q.G., I got that and I have heard of Mr. Hermanson, but as I live in Germany I would prefer the Om-Doktor, the former head of the Olympus repair shop in Hamburg. He's closer and did a perfect job on my OM-1n. But in this case I'll try it on my own. Although in practical terms the OM-2n is the better camera, I am more drawn to manual cameras and don't want to spent too much money on this one.</p>

<p>Thanks for your answers. I'll give it a try. If the weather is not too nice to stay inside, I could do it next weekend. If I succeed, I'll post some photos of my Olympus family.</p>

<p>The Vor Frelsers Kirk (church) has a unique tower and from the top you have a nice look out. Christiania is also worth visiting.</p>

<p>Just recently I got an Olympus OM-2n for a very reasonable price. I already have an OM-1n and some lenses as my main camera so I thought this would be a nice companion. I already replaced the light seals and the mirror bumper. Shooting my first film I realized a fault. When out of use for some time the shutter opens for a much too long time. This happens only at the first picture, the following pictures everything works just fine. I did some research and found out it might be a sticky shutter holding magnet. On youtube I found a video that shows the cleaning of the magnet of a OM-10.<br> Doesn't look too complicated. Can anyone tell me if the procedure is the same for my OM-2n or if it is different?</p>

<p>Better lenses offer in general a higher resolution, sharpness and contrast. They are faster, so you can use them in low light situations and keep ISO low and offer more photographic possibilities (shallow dof). What makes the two cameras you mentioned more expensive is the size of the sensor (in case of the Sony), the features and the build quality as they are for the professionel or semi-professionel market other than the G5. You can compare them better with the Pana GH4 and you'll see the price difference disappeares. Only you can tell if you need FF or the features of these cameras. But as I said, the investment in better lenses and improvement of post processing is more likely to increase image quality.</p>

<p>IMO the only noticable increase in image quality would give a FF camera and even that probably only in large prints or really low light situations. I would keep the G5 and invest in better lenses. You didn't write about your post processing? Do you shoot raw? Lightroom or similar programms offer many options to get the results you like and a good book about your programm and some time to learn it would probably be much cheaper and more effective than a new camera.</p>

<p>The E-PL1 was my first m4/3-camera. It produces sharp pictures with very pleasing jpgs. I sold it in favour of a G3, but still have many prints of the Oly hanging on my wall. With an fd or om lens the image stabilizer is really excellent. I miss it on my G3. I really would suggest to give it a try.</p>

<p>Both system are of very good quality and I suspect you won't see a difference in 99% of your prints. Take the cameras in your hands and decide which fits better.<br> I have an "older" m4/3 camera, the Pana G3, and love the compactness of the camera and the lenses. Image quality is excellent, but my largest prints are only 16x20 square inches.</p>

<p>Isn't real b&w this thing with coated glass plates?</p>

<p>Looks like even a Contax is capable of making good photos ;-)</p>

<p>David, do you think the bombing of Dresden, Braunschweig and many more german cities towards the end of the war by the american and british air force was any better than the horrible deeds of these red army soldiers just because it was commanded by high ranks? I understand the desire for revenge when I look at both actions, but still think it was not human and not justifiable. Having said that, I'm still thankful to the allied forces that they freed germany from the nazi regime. I am german, born in 1964. I grew up in a country that I think learned it's lesson, but still suffers on a psychological level under the consequences of the war. Many of the generation of my parents and grand-parents not only remained silent, out of guilt or shame or suppression, but was also emotionally withdrawn. The german word for "responsibilty" is "Verantwortung", which includes the word "Antwort" or "answer". Every participating nation in this dreadful war must seek it's own answers instead on pointing the finger on the others.<br> Regarding the photo in question. For me it's propaganda and it's value rises and falls with my grade of approval with the aims of the publishers. I dislike propaganda, when I think it wants me to identify with the power of a group/nation or whatever. Maybe one lesson I learned from german history. Even if I can identify with the american soldiers who fought a necessary war, the photo still leaves me with a feeling of dislike.<br> I think it's a difficult task to differentiate between the content and esthetical aspects, if possible at all. Leni Riefenstahl was a terrific photographer and director, but I still think she was nazi whore.</p>

<p>"You may have a depression", was my first thought. I am a clinical psychologist myself. But on a different level I can understand and share your thoughts. I am an amateur for more than 35 years now, started photography at the age of 13, and am still interessted in photography. Wouldn't write this, if I wasn't. But sometimes I thing with the event of digital photography there are too many photos around, like I find there's too much audio noise around. The older I get the more I have a desire for tranquility.</p>

<p>Your introduction sounds like you had a very inspiring day. I would have loved to see your photos, but the video is blocked in germany, because of the copyright for the music :-(</p>

<p>If you don't print larger than 8x10, go for m4/3. You won't see the diference.</p>

<p>I can't comment on the risk for your film, but you'll find a list with pro labs in the german speaking parts of Switzerland here : http://photonews.de/service/labore/index.php<br> <br />You may find a pro lab in Geneva, too.<br> If you want to buy film in Switzerland be aware that everything in Switzerland is really expensive.</p>

<p>My first camera was a Voigtländer Vitrona. My uncle bought it in 1964, my birthyear and I received it from him when I was maybe 11. I wish I still had it, but some 15 years later the shutter and the transport didn't work any more and it developed fungus due to bad storage. I stored it some time in a room I thought was dry, but it wasn't.<br /> Here's a link to a photo on the net:<br /> http://www.collection-appareils.fr/x/html/page_standard.php?id_appareil=2776</p> <p>Actually the camera is one of few models from that era that is a collectabel, because it was the first cam with a built in electronic flash. I tried to get one during the last years, but they are rare and expensive. I bought a Vitomatic IIa, which is the better camera but it's not the same.<br /> The photo attached was my english teacher.<br /> <br /><br /></p><div></div>

<p>My first camera was a Voigtländer Vitrona. My uncle bought it in 1964, my birthyear and I received it from him when I was maybe 11. I wish I still had it, but some 15 years later the shutter and the transport didn't work any more and it developed fungus due to bad storage. I stored it some time in a room I thought was dry, but it wasn't.<br> Here's a link to a photo on the net:<br> http://www.collection-appareils.fr/x/html/page_standard.php?id_appareil=2776</p> <p>Actually the camera is one of few models from that era that is a collectabel, because it was the first cam with a built in electronic flash. I tried to get one during the last years, but they are rare and expensive. I bought a Vitomatic IIa, which is the better camera but it's not the same.<br> The photo attached was my first attempt in sports photography. It didn't start a career.<br> <br /><br /></p>

<p>No problem, Stephen.</p>