gordonbennett

Close to 15 years ago I bought a photography vest. It had straps that were stowed in pockets that you could put around your knees when seated, that supplied back support. You sit on the ground, put the straps around your knees, and the vest supported your back as if you were in a chair. It was just a little too big when I bought it, and now that I've lost 70 pounds it's really too big. I can't find any identifying labels on it. Does anyone know who made this vest?

OK, I got you. I'll try a 675 in the OM-1 without any mods when the 625 runs out. I was curious tough, because the OM-2n has a crescent-shaped spacer for the LR44s.

Ah. My OM-1 takes a 625.

My 625 cells have a larger diameter than my LR44 cels.

The 625 has a larger diameter than the LR44.

I've just picked up an OM-2n. They used the same body as the OM-1, so the battery compartment is sized for a 625 mercury cell; but there's a crescent-shaped spacer in it so that two LR44 cells can be used. I have an OM-1n. I've had it modified to use a 625 silver oxide cell (1.5v), and had the meter calibrated. The 625 cells are a little harder to find than the LR44s. Is there a crescent-shaped adapter I can buy so that I can use one LR44 cell in my OM-1n?

I got the OM-2n. It was waiting in my desk when I got back from 'vacation'. The meter's reading two stops low, so it's in the shop for recalibration.

I've had my OM-1n modified (diode) and calibrated to use a 1.5v #625 cell.

My typing got ahead of my brain. I meant to say that the FE is an auto-exposure version of the FM.

nm. Read the question wrong.

Well, I pulled the trigger on an OM-2n. My auto-exposure cameras include a Canon AE-1 Program, a Canon A-1, an Olympus OM-4, and Olympus OM10, a Nikon FM3a, and a Nikon FE. An OM-2n is definitely redundant, but... My most complete 'kit' is Olympus. The OM10 doesn't really 'fit' the way the FE fits with my Nikon kit. I think of it this way: The FE is an electronic version of the FM. I have an FM2n, which is a newer model, with auto-exposure, of the FM. The OM-2 is basically an electronic version, with auto-exposure, of the OM-1.

Where's the :smackhead: smiley? It looks like I'm the one getting lost!

I should have specified I'm using 35mm film.

I could have written exactly the same thing. Second SLR, and the advertising.

My second SLR was the OM-4. It was the advertising showing adventure photography that grabbed me.

I took a 'near mint' Nikon FE into the shop because it arrived broken and it wasn't worth it to send it back to the seller in Japan. The shop owner told me it would cost more to fix it than I probably paid for it. I already knew that; the repair is going to cost at least US$169. But in the end I'll have a repaired and fully-serviced camera. You are absolutely correct that K1000s are so cheap they're not worth repairing. On the other hand, how much will you spend on replacements when thy fail? You're replacing it with a used camera that might need a repair soon after you buy it. You replace it with another one, and that one may have issues. Personally, I'd rather spend the money up front. (But I'm hoping my K1000 lasts a long time.)

As some of you may have read, I've begun shooting my way through my camera collection. I've never done any long-exposure photography, and I'd like to give it a try. The Nikon FE seems particularly well-suited to this, and I'd like to try some with the Olympus OM10. I want to set up at an intersection and get light streaks from passing cars. From what I've read, you just set the FE to the desired aperture, and the camera does the rest. I think I read it will make exposures up to an hour, which is way more than enough. I don't know about the OM10. It seems that the manual adapter allows 1 to 1/1000 second. What if I set f/16 on the lens? Will the OM10 automatically time the shutter? Or is there a limit? If I wanted to set the exposure manually, using Bulb, how do I calculate the time? (I understand that intersections are different and have different lighting, different amounts of traffic, etc.)

That's exactly what I like about it! :p Yeah, I have an OM-4 so an OM-2 seems redundant. (But I don't haaaaaave an OM-2! :p )

I suffer from Gear Acquisition Syndrome. I have an extremely busy life, and for the past several years I haven't been 'making' pictures. I've been using a DSLR and my iPhone to 'take' pictures. But recently I've gotten the urge to pull out my 35mm SLR collection and shoot through it. Since I have GAS, this led me to buy a Pentax SV and a Canon Canonet QL17 GIII. I like reading about my cameras, so I find reviews. Reviews often lead to other cameras. And so I started reading about the Olympus OM-2. Yesterday I almost bought one. Before reading the review, I assumed that the OM-2 was an OM-1 with aperture priority grafted on. It looks like I assumed incorrectly. The reviewers all like the OM-2, but it looks like the OM-2 is a completely electronic camera that doesn't even have a fail-safe mechanical mode in case of battery failure. (This appears to have been addressed in the OM-2S.) I have an OM-1 and an OM-4, and even an OM10. (God knows how that one came into my possession!) My rational self said to my GAS-afflicted self, 'Why do you need an OM-2? What does it do that your Nikon FE or FM3a doesn't do? Aside from being smaller, lighter, and prettier, what does it do that the Canon AE-1 Program and A-1 don't do? The whole reason you bought that second-hand OM-1 a quarter of a century ago, after realising you were relying too much on the OM-4's AE mode, was because it's mechanical and manual. Heck, if you want a focus-and-shoot camera, you have that OM10! You don't have time to use the cameras you already have! Don't you think an OM-2 would be superfluous?' My GAS-afflicted self replies, 'But it's pretty!) So tell me: Is there any rational reason I should add an OM-2 to my collection?

The other day, I bought the Pocket Light Meter app for my iPhone. Today I put a 1.5v #625 into my Asahi Pentax clip-on light meter. I aimed the iPhone out the window, and the Pocket Light Meter said that I should use f/5.0 at 1/250 second. I aimed the clip-on meter out the window, and set the shutter speed to 1/250 second. With the meter switched to 'H', the needle is at the edge of the black marking. That is, the needle is halfway between f/4 and f/5.6. I assumed ASA 400 film, and set the meter's ASA dial to 200. With this initial test, it looks like I might be able to use the meter with a 1.5v cell by reducing the ASA setting from 400 to 200. It's going to be a while before I'll have a chance to get out the Pentax SV and try it, after more comparison readings between the iPhone and the clip-on meter, with film. When I get a chance, I'll compare the Pocket Light Meter to the QL17 to see if I can 'calibrate' the meter with the ASA setting on it.

I think this answers my question. It seems the OM-1 was the 'professional' camera, but it was overshadowed by Nikon/Olympus.

Mine's not on the market! :p The OM-1 is a wonderful camera. I just had mine CLA'd and calibrated for a 1.5v cell. And yes, it's very pretty. :)

Yes, that's what I'm getting at. (At least I think it is. It's 07:11, and I'm only on my second cuppa joe. I'll wake up when I start the second pot.) The Wikipedia article on the OM-4 says 'Their rugged construction also appealed to professional photographers...', but Olympus cameras don't come to mind as the tools of people who make their living with cameras like the Nikon and Canon do.

When I think of photojournalists, studio photographers, and other professional photographers in the days before digital photography, I picture them with a Nikon F or a Canon F-1. In my imagination, I specifically see the Canon shooter covering professional sports. I know that Pentax made a professional-level camera, the LX, but the closest I can come to a professional camera by Olympus is the OM-1. That's not to say that the OM-1 isn't an excellent camera. It's my favourite camera in my collection. I know the OM-1 was popular with adventurers. I think one of the things that induced me to buy my OM-1 was seeing ads with photos taken from mountain peaks. My OM-4 is also a fine camera. I bought it when I had illusions of becoming a paid photographer. I don't see the OM-4 being used to capture images in the middle of a war zone, though. Olympus cameras strike me as cameras for 'adventurers', 'explorers', and 'serious amateurs', as opposed to photojournalists. So the question is this: Did Olympus make a 'professional' 35mm SLR, that is analogous to the Nikon F and Canon F-1?

I don't actually know if the QL17 is two stops off. I'm making an assumption based on someone else's experience, and others' experiences are different. I think what I'll do is take the FM3a, and a light meter along when I take the QL17 out. I can compare the QL17 to another camera and to the light meter, and adjust it accordingly.