OM, I've become a Zuikoholic!

shadowfox said:
John,
I don't have a hood for the 24/2. I imagine it would certainly help. Though I don't have a single photo that is messed up by flare. For example:

6855809820_69439107f9_c.jpg


There's a bright sun somewhere in the picture above :)
Click to expand...

Pictures are louder than words. Thank you kindly sir as this answers my question. :)
 
MaxFrank said:
Wow, I never realized how awesome these OM cameras look. I'm tempted to buy one now but I also realize that I do have a perfectly fine working minolta X-700. Could someone compare the size of these bodies, and even better if they have experience with both tell me which they prefer. Glass for the olympus seems to be more readily available, but the minolta glass is cheaper.
Click to expand...


Minolta X-700 by Olympus OM-2n by sreed2006, on Flickr

I prefer the Olympus OM cameras, but the Minolta X-700 is also quite a nice camera. (This particular X-700 is not functional because the film advance lever does not cause the film to advance. :()
 
Pete B said:
I bought a an OM1n and an OM 2n and some lenses on impulse a few months ago. Rather than take my Leica ski touring in Alaska I took the OM1n. It performed faultlessly and I'm very impressed with the flare resistance. It's got me wondering if I really need so much money tied up in Leica glass/bodies.

Pete
Click to expand...

Pete, Those are some lovely samples you posted. I especially like the mailboxes. Which lens and film did you use?

What's your opinion on picture quality between the two systems?

I have never had any Leica gear to make my own comparison.

Thanks, Bill
 
wblynch said:
Pete, Those are some lovely samples you posted. I especially like the mailboxes. Which lens and film did you use?

What's your opinion on picture quality between the two systems?

I have never had any Leica gear to make my own comparison.

Thanks, Bill
Click to expand...

Thanks Bill.
My eye isn't sophisticated enough to tell much difference between the two systems. I suspect that I might see less in the way of chromatic aberration (eg branches against bright sky) with Leica but I couldn't swear to it. If someone were to ask me if it was worth the expense of getting into the Leica M system from OM I'd have to say no. The OM with 35/2.8 feels lighter than my M2 and 35/2 asph. It is also slightly smaller. The lenses are cheap enough to abuse in a back pack and very light and compact. It's a great system. In low light it may be that the Leica's aberrations are better controlled but I have to say that it's the aberrations that, for me, make film look so nice. See the two attached photos. They've a lovely feel to them. (With the 50/1.4). I think the flare on the 2nd shot is due to the lens steaming up on entering the cafe.

The mailboxes were with the much maligned 35mm/2.8. You know, the one that isn't sharp ;). The film is Portra 400. I used a cheap KOOD 3 stop ND filter to get the aperture wider.

I bought the OM1n and OM2n off the auction site. I put new light seals in both. I'm not sure if I'll be using the OM2n if someone in the UK is interested. I've a couple of lenses (50/1.4, 28/3.5) and a winder2 available.

Pete

CNV00023.jpg

CNV00022.jpg
 
Got a question if someone could answer. My Om-1 viewfinder is kinda dusty and it seems like the dust is on the focusing screen. The viewfinder looks clean. So what can i do about that ? Tried to clean it without removing it, but nothing ... seems like the dust is inside.
 
Drago said:
Got a question if someone could answer. My Om-1 viewfinder is kinda dusty and it seems like the dust is on the focusing screen. The viewfinder looks clean. So what can i do about that ? Tried to clean it without removing it, but nothing ... seems like the dust is inside.
Click to expand...

Has the camera ever been overhauled with new foam? I've heard that deteriorating foam can present like this.
 
Ken Ford said:
Has the camera ever been overhauled with new foam? I've heard that deteriorating foam can present like this.
Click to expand...

I don't think so. When i got it was dirty, so i cleaned it, put new light seals and a friend of mine cleaned the viewfinder from dust. I looked around it and there's some foam along the screen, but it looks fine
 
I don't think so. I think i should remove the focusing screen and clean it. Removing it i think it's not so hard, buut ... I'm afraid i could mess up the meter ( is it possible ) Also any tips how to remove it are welcome :)
 
Removing the focusing screen is easy. With a fingernail or non-marking tool, press up on the frame tab and it will unlatch. Remove the screen with the tool included with the screen, or very carefully with tweezers.

Do NOT use any alcohol-based cleaner on the screen. If you cannot brush or blow off all the dust, you can use a bit of distilled water, then blot dry with a lint free cloth such as Kimwipes or similar.
 
Those focusing screens are very delicate and easily damaged. Be very careful cleaning them.

I ruined my first one years ago by not knowing better.
 
wblynch said:
Those focusing screens are very delicate and easily damaged. Be very careful cleaning them.

I ruined my first one years ago by not knowing better.
Click to expand...

Me too. It went back in far far worse than it came out :bang:. 30 years later, my heart was in my mouth when I bought a new screen for my Hasselblad!
Pete
 
Peddling Goods
peddling_goods_by_philosomatographer-d4vpest.jpg

(OM-4Ti, Zuiko 21mm f/2.0 at f/8.0, Kodak TMY400-2)

A second-hand clothing salesman in Braamfontein, Johannesburg.

The 21/2 has no equal; there is no substitute. 12x16in, 16x20in prints are no problem for this lens, the limiting factor is the film (if shooting something with medium grain like the above, that is). Rangefinder shooters bang on about their superior wide-angle lenses, but truth be told, despite any theoretical advantages, you cannot ask for more in the 35mm format than what the Zuiko gives you, unless you really want to get this same resolution at f/2.8 (which would be odd indeed, since the field would be quite shallow, destroying most of the details in anyway).

I just got myself some Adox CMS20 to properly test the resolution capabilities of the Zuikos, I'll report back once I've shot some.
​
 
Some images from the 50mm f/1.2. I perchance managed to acquire a new one manufactured in 2002 according to its date code - talk about a find! I'm really loving what it can do, especially with Pan F.

What's Keeping Her?
what__s_keeping_her__by_philosomatographer-d4vpek4.jpg

(OM-4Ti, Zuiko 50/1.2, Kodak TMY400-2)

Skyward Pots
skyward_pots_by_philosomatographer-d4vppky.jpg

(OM-4Ti, Zuiko 50/1.2, Ilford Pan F)
Receding Tables
receding_tables_by_philosomatographer-d4vpnqt.jpg

(OM-4Ti, Zuiko 50/1.2, Kodak TMY400-2)
Neighborgoods Market Alley
neighborgoods_market_alley_by_philosomatographer-d4vppa0.jpg

(OM-4Ti, Zuiko 50/1.2, Kodak TMY400-2)

Lord of fake mice
lord_of_fake_mice_by_philosomatographer-d4vpmz0.jpg

(OM-4Ti, Zuiko 50/1.2, Kodak TMY400-2)
​
 
Holy crap! I'm one of the oldest Zuikoholics here, and I never come across finds like that! Congrats, and give me your address so I can steal that lens. :D
 
Well i clean it. It still has some dust on it, but i don't think i'd go with anything with water on it. But it's better now. Oohh, and these guys really thought how to make it easy. Press the frame tab and it comes down. I have small hands so i just took it out
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top