tomspielman

Well, you can find them pretty cheap if you really want one. ;)

At least based on what they're fetching on eBay. I received an AX-3 pretty much for free, cleaned it up, put in new light seals and have been pleasantly surprised. It's as compact as an Olympus OM (which I like) and while it may have more plastic than the higher end OM-1, 2, 3, 4, etc. they seem to be better built than the OM-10, 20s, 30s, etc. Yet the asking price for even the lowly OM-10 seems to be skyrocketing. But Fujica AX cameras? Not really. Is it just the lack of lenses? I can kind of see that but I'm thinking that the people buying OM-10s aren't buying a plethora of lenses to go with it.

Once it became practical to fit ships with steam engines, sailing ships slowly fell out of favor. Most people in the business were anxious to switch to something faster, simpler to operate, and cheaper. But while it's now rare to see people or goods transported by sail, sailing goes on as a hobby. And sails as propulsion for transporting cargo and people may also make a comeback for ecological reasons. I don't expect film to follow the exact same path but there are some similarities. Sailing is a lot more work than piloting a powerboat, and generally a lot slower. But for many people it's also a lot more satisfying. Just like film is for those who continue to use it. In many ways sailing and sailboats seem to be stuck in time. The vast majority of sailboats on my lake are decades old. But innovation does occur, - especially in high end racing and cruising boats. Maybe the same will happen with film and film cameras but I'm not sure what would spur that. Sailing as a pastime has had its up and downs but I doubt it will ever disappear completely. I expect the same will be true for film. It's been gaining some popularity in recent years and there's no guarantee that that will continue, but I expect that there will be people shooting film for decades into the future.

The AX-3 is definitely manual focus. Does need a battery for shutter operation. What about cameras that typically need a battery to operate but will shoot at 1/60th without a battery? Hopefully you all will have this sorted out before I'm ready to post my thoughts on the camera. Would like to shoot a roll of film and process it first. That will take some time. Still needs light seals. ;)

Not sure where a 35mm Fujica AX-3 from the early 80s belongs. It has a full manual mode but but also has some electronics.

So this is your fault... ;)

Even 35mm P&S cameras are getting expensive though. I paid more for a good P&S for my son's girlfriend last Summer than I did for a Yashica 12 a few years ago.

I know what you mean. A few years ago I bought a Fujica GS645 and last Summer the film advance started acting up. I found a service manual and snapped a screw off in the process of disassembly, probably because it was left handed. Would have been nice if the service manual would have mentioned that. Could not find a part or even a suitable "as is" camera that I could use for parts without spending a small fortune. Then I considered looking for a "Texas Leica" instead but as you've said, prices have skyrocketed. I ended up finding a small enough tap that I could drill out the remains of the broken screw on my existing camera and rethread the hole. The head of the original screw had an usually large head that the take up film spool fits over. I used JB Weld over the top of a cap head screw to build it up to the right size and then filed it down to the proper shape. A lot of work to replace a damn screw. Anyway, the camera works again. If I didn't like it so much I could turn nice profit. Fuji/Fujica made some really unique medium format cameras. I keep searching on craigslist hoping another one will turn up for a reasonable price. No luck.

Soda Ash, - which is basically the same thing except that Washing Soda typically contains more moisture. For that reason soda ash would be better for Caffenol than washing soda but you'd want probably want to use less. However, I know that some people bake their washing soda to get the moisture out so it's not clear to me if soda ash could be used as a 1 to 1 substitute.

I'll go out on a limb and assume you haven't tried it. :) If you want consistently near perfect photos without all the fuss of mixing developers, then shoot digital. But if you enjoy that aspect of photography then it is kind of fun to mess with caffenol and you do get good results. If you can follow a recipe, you can successfully process film with caffenol. Is it better than Kodak's offerings? Generally no, but there are some advantages. One problem for many commercial developers is shelf life. It's not an issue if you shoot enough film, but if shooting film is just an occasional hobby, you can end up wasting a lot of chemicals. With Caffenol, you mix up as much as you need. Of course there's HC-110 and similar products but honestly I don't know that my photos turned out any better with HC-110 than Caffenol. The other supposed advantage to Caffenol I don't think is really true anymore. The whole idea was to come up with something that people could develop film with using ingredients they'd find around their home. At least in the US, not many people use instant coffee anymore, nor do they have washing soda. In fact depending on where you live, washing soda might be pretty hard to find. Same with the type of Vitamin-C that's recommended. Still, the ingredients are pretty simple to come by overall and not expensive. Many home-brew developers that might give better results require chemicals that you don't find just anywhere, are more toxic, and you might have to purchase them in amounts that would make one think twice. I don't use Caffenol anymore but I'd never talk anyone out of it that wants to try it. In fact I'd encourage people to if they're interested at all.

Love those !

I've developed a few rolls of film that were left in cameras I bought, - nothing as old as this though. Always makes me wonder about the lives those people led. Even the young girl may be gone by now. Fashion changes aside I find it somehow reassuring that you could snap a photo today that wouldn't look that much different. People are people. Young kids will still bashfully nibble on finger while looking at a camera, - and big hams a minute later. The older woman looks like any number of aunts and great aunts that I had along with their friends in my old town.

Since no one else has replied yet, I'll put in my 2 cents. My understanding is that modern zooms have a come a long ways and I don't know that you'd notice much difference. But what I would do if I were you is look for reviews on the particular zoom to see what people think. Most of the posts I see in the Medium Format forum deal with film cameras so you could also try the mirrorless forum to see if you get more responses there. Good luck !

I have the "Tele-Astranar" version of that 400mm f 6.3 lens. That along with my Olympus 135mm f 3.5 are two of the highest level of fun per dollar invested lenses that I own. If you end up keeping one of your OM cameras I highly recommend the 135. They're relatively plentiful, inexpensive, and have a built-in retractable lens hood.

The OM-2 was ground breaking at the time but they aren't particularly hard to find. Even though prices have been climbing just as they have for lots of classic cameras, you can still find them for reasonable prices if you're patient and don't mind doing a little cleanup. Just the other day I saw an incredibly dusty black OM-2n listed locally for $150 and I'd bet they'd let it go for $125 or maybe even $100. It's just listed as an Olympus camera and the main photo is of a badly beat up camera case with all the leatherette pealed off. You have to scroll through the pictures to realize it's an OM-2n underneath. I'm continually shocked at how little effort people put into selling some stuff. Blow the dust of the camera, throw away the camera case, and specify the model in the posting and they could easily get $100 more.

Important Maintenance Note on the OM-2n The film door light seals on both cameras are probably shot, - you may or may not get light leaks, but the thing you'd want to address sooner rather than later if you're planning on keeping the OM-2n for any length of time is the foam on top of the pentaprism. The foam deteriorates and eats away at the silver coating on the prism. Eventually this will show up as irregular blotches, stains, marks, etc on the bottom of the viewfinder. It's pretty easy to deal with, - remove the top cover and clear away the foam using tweezers, alcohol soaked swabs, etc. You might have to remove the bracket for the flash socket to get at everything. Then just put a put a piece of black electrical tape between the bracket and the pentaprism. There are youtube videos that show the process. It was already too late for about half of the OM-1 and OM-2 cameras that I've owned. One good thing to know is that cheap and broken OM-10 cameras use the same pentaprism if you need or want to replace it.

Another chicken and egg thing. I'd be completely clueless about working with models and would need to take a class or two. Hopefully the instructor(s) could provide some resources or leads on getting models for those photographers just getting started. I could even see banding together with some classmates to hire one. I would guess there are both beginning models that would be willing to work with beginning photographers and experienced models who serve a niche market of working with beginning photographers. My guess is that it would go better if at least one person in the room knows what they're doing. :)

Wow, that's a beauty. Fujica/Fujiflm makes some interesting cameras.

Accessory Shoe By far the biggest design flaw in the OM-1 and OM-2 cameras. Let's take a piece of plastic and repeatedly clamp it down on top of what does a nice impression of a log splitter and see how long it takes to split. I think I've had at least eight of these cameras and only 2 accessory shoes have been completely intact, - and I'm not selling them. :)

The hidden power off button It works on the OM-2s and I'm guessing it'll work on the OM-4: Set the shutter speed to bulb. On the OM-2s this shut off the metering system. I did this before putting the camera away and always got decent battery life. AE Lock Spot metering is what the OM cameras used instead. With the OM-4, aim the camera at the area you want to meter, and press the spot button. A diamond will appear above the proper shutter speed based on the selected aperture and it will stay there. You can then recompose and the camera will use the shutter speed indicated by the diamond. EVEN BETTER, you can point the camera at another area, press spot again, and a 2nd diamond will appear above the new shutter speed (if it had changed). If you press the shutter button now, the camera will choose an average shutter speed based on the two diamonds. You can set up to 8 spots. I don't own an OM-4 but this is my understanding of how it worked. Spot metering was dumbed down on the OM-2s. I know you don't have one, but it explains how you can achieve the same thing on an OM-2n (or close to it). Here's how it worked: On the OM-2s, the manual mode and spot metering mode were the same. You put the camera in spot/manual mode, - aimed the camera at the area you want to meter, then center the light meter reading between the markers using either the aperture setting, the shutter speed setting, or both. You then recompose and shoot. If this sounds confusing, then imagine a manual exposure camera with a needle that you center to get the proper the exposure. It's exactly the same, except with LEDs in the case of the 2s. In fact the only difference with the OM-2s in spot mode and a manual exposure camera is that the 2s only meters the small circled area in the middle of the frame. This process tells you exactly how to lock exposure on an OM-2n. Put the camera in manual mode, aim it at the area you want to meter. Center the needle and recompose. With the OM-2n however, it's not spot metering, it's center weighted. I know, that's not really AE lock, but it works. It's much the same as the exposure compensation dial on those cameras. All it's really doing changing the effective ASA. You can do the same thing on a camera with no exposure compensation settings.

When I first started considering an OM camera, the OM-2n was what most people recommended and it is a great camera. I also had a 2sp for awhile. I was lucky in that it didn't have the battery drain issue that plagued so many of them. A few years ago I realized that I had way more cameras that I could ever use on any sort of regular basis. So I decided to keep only one 35mm SLR and sell the rest. It wasn't an easy choice, but the OM-1n is what I held on to. Actually the truth is that I wasn't going to keep an SLR either, and I've sold 2 or 3 OM-1n cameras only to buy another one. So maybe keeping an SLR wasn't an actual decision. It's just kind of what happened.

As q.g. said, the OM-4ti is the top of the line and they fetch a lot of money. The OM-4 (non ti) had some battery drain issues. That was fixed in some versions apparently and my impression was that by the time the OM-4ti came out, it was a non issue. So your OM-4 may be fine in that regard. It's hard to tell from the photo but is that an OM-2n? It looks like there's a little 'n' next to the "OM-2" on top of the camera. The 'n' version uses a different accessory shoe than the plain "OM-2". I believe that Olympus was trying to standardize, - the OM-1n and the OM-2n used the same shoe. The OM-1(n) and OM-2(n) were sold at the same time. From a collectors standpoint some prefer the OM-1n because it's an all mechanical camera. However others consider the OM-2n the best of the OM cameras outside of the extremely expensive OM-3 and OM-4ti. It featured a revolutionary OTF (off the film) metering system. I've owned several different OM cameras and finally settled on an OM-1n because it's a fully manual camera and I like the solid sounding shutter and and the mirror lockup. I have other cameras with auto exposure features. That said that OM-2n works as well as advertised and if you use a lot of flash would be far better than the OM-1n. The OM-2 and OM-2n also had some revolutionary flash features for their time. All the OM cameras have one great feature from my perspective, - their size. That's what sold me on them. I got rid of all my classic Canons after using an OM for awhile.