Which PEN F to buy?

S

shorelineae

Finder of ranges
Local time
3:01 PM
Joined
Jan 17, 2019
Messages
170
I have a Ricoh Caddy that I love and decided I want a half-frame camera that will allow me to focus accurately in low-light (indoors) situations. The Caddy's meter works fine too, and I am able to shoot very fast with it (zone-focused).

So I looked at the smaller PEN models and they seem too similar to the Caddy to be of interest. Hence, the PEN F series makes sense for me. I'm a 50mm guy normally, so a Olympus PEN F with a 38mm seems the obvious choice.

The big question is: which should I go for: F or FT or FV :-O I have read about the differences and I can't make up my mind.

The meter would be useful to have. How badly does it affect viewfinder brightness?

How painful is double-stroke vs single-stroke (I've never used a double-stroke camera before).
 
Condition of the sample you find is probably more important than any differences among the Pen F models. I have two FT and one FV and was a bit surprised that this FV's viewfinder isn't any brighter than the others. May need cleaning... These are old cameras from the 1960s so I would say just go with the best sample you find. The FT runs fine without batteries, and FWIW the FT metering is kinda weird anyway!

The double-stroke film advance is easy to get used to, and is a smart design decision... because there is right-angle gearing in there to cock the rotating shutter. The wind lever's shaft is vertical while the shutter rotates on a horizontal axis. This gearing tends to be a bit delicate I understand, and is prone to feeling pretty rough. Be gentle!
 
If you want to actually use the camera (as opposed to show it off as a collectible item) then better stay away from the Pen F. Both the Pen FT and the Pen FV are more advanced designs and hence, more reliable. The F has one single spring to move mirror and aperture; the FT and FV have two. Furthermore, the F's rotating shutter hits a hard stop; FT and FV use a two-step brake.

The difference in viewfinder brightness is barely perceptible. So don't hesitate to go for an FT if you appreciate the slightly odd TTL metering system (which works without an aperture simulator, pretty unique!). Use an SR44 1.55 V silver oxide cell in a PX625 adapter. For a two-lens outfit, I recommend the G.Zuiko Auto-S 40 mm 1:1.4 and the G.Zuiko Auto-W 25 mm 1:2.8. Avoid the 25 mm 1:4, it's hard to focus. And yes, always advance the film gently, there's delicate gearing inside.
 
I just tried FT and F, and the latter have visibly brighter viewfinder. Even double checked with second FT. Never tried the FV.

As for the lenses the 40/1.4 is wonderful.
 
For low light usage I think fast-glass is beneficial. I have the FT and a 40/f1.4 and find it useable for low light indoor situations; it just takes a bit of extra time to find the focus point with some of the light being split and directed to the light meter.
Assuming you've not yet handed a Pen F at the time of writing, when you do be careful advancing the film as it gets close to the last frame or two as it can be difficult to feel any resistance. If the film is taught, ie it's at the end, and you wind on irrespective not knowing, there's a risk or tearing the sprocket holes. I've done it once, but now I'm very careful and probably err on the safe side by stopping at frame 70, or 71 if I'm feeling lucky.
 
Ricoh said:
.
Assuming you've not yet handed a Pen F at the time of writing, when you do be careful advancing the film as it gets close to the last frame or two as it can be difficult to feel any resistance. If the film is taught, ie it's at the end, and you wind on irrespective not knowing, there's a risk or tearing the sprocket holes. I've done it once, but now I'm very careful and probably err on the safe side by stopping at frame 70, or 71 if I'm feeling lucky.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the tip. Does it happen only on the original F?
 
my experience with Pen-F was a disaster!
Both models developed shutter problems..
The viewfinder was not that easy to use.
Due to (apparent larger depth of field) had reasonable images.
As they are now old, probably OK..
 
Pen F choice

Pen F choice

Sometime in the 1980s, I decided to act on my continuing interest in the Pen F system as a user camera. I bought an FT with several prime lenses and one zoom. As a collectible, the system has enough oddities to warrant retention. However after playing with it long enough to get familiar and taking it as my only photo gear on one trip, our love affair was over. The FT metering is a slow-working thing - better than no meter at all, but just. The viewfinder is dim, and the focusing is a pain compared to conventional SLRs. Thankfully, a large swap meet relieved me of most of my disappointment.
 
I've owned all three of the Pen F SLRs, some of them more than once. The FV was my favorite, and the various Zuiko prime lenses outstanding. The zoom lenses of that era weren't really up to the grade needed for the half frame format, IMO, but the tiny 50-90mm f/3.5 zoom was very convenient and performed well enough (presuming you used a lens hood to hold down flare).

I didn't find the FT's meter to be much of a value add, regardless of viewfinder brightness ... a handheld meter (or metering app on your smartphone) does a lot better.

Like with other small format film, high quality can be achieved but it takes a good bit of work to gain the skill required and attention to details in exposure, processing, and rendering are essential. The Olympus Pen F series lenses, however, work beautifully on Micro-FourThirds digital cameras ... The 70mm f/2 was my favorite.


Panasonic G1 + Olympus Pen-F Zuiko 70mm f/2​

enjoy!
G
 
My Pen F has become my go to camera. Light or no light. That with the super common Zuiko Auto-S 38mm f1.8 (which is the equivalent of a 55mm) makes a great set up. Also, what I really dig about the lens is that minimum distance is 35cm/1ft so you can get real close and as long as you mind your DOF, well, you can get some amazing results. Amazing to me at least. The camera doesn't have a meter but that doesn't bother me one bit as I have a light meter with me at all time. But hey, all of this is me, ya know? To each their own so take everything I say with a grain of salt :)
 
I have a PEN-M42 adapter that I can use with M42 mount lenses on the PEN. I have an F and an FT. The Pentax 85/1.8 becomes a 170/1.8 on the PEN.
 
shorelineae said:
Thanks for the tip. Does it happen only on the original F?
Click to expand...
I've not used the gothic Pen F (the original). The sprocket tearing referred to happened on the Pen FT. Basically there's very little feel as the film is advanced. You'll be ok as long as you know.
Lens-wise, apart from the 40/f1.4 I also have the 70/f2 and recommend these, stunning performers.
 
ka7197 said:
... Both the Pen FT and the Pen FV are more advanced designs and hence, more reliable. The F has one single spring to move mirror and aperture; the FT and FV have two. Furthermore, the F's rotating shutter hits a hard stop; FT and FV use a two-step brake.
...
Click to expand...

Good information - makes me feel better about my FT, though I originally wanted an F.
 
raid said:
I have a PEN-M42 adapter that I can use with M42 mount lenses on the PEN. I have an F and an FT. The Pentax 85/1.8 becomes a 170/1.8 on the PEN.
Click to expand...

Angle of view of a 85mm lens on a half frame would be approximately 1.4 X 85mm, or about a 120mm on a full frame.
However of course, the half frame negative will contain only 1/2 the information that a full frame negative contains.

I've shot with half frame for 45 years and my little Pen F has definitely the best focusing. The screen is a all matte surface and is brighter than a FV that I have. Go figure.

I'm also partial to the 3:4 aspect ratio.
 
Auto-body shop paint stuff
U77I1378881029.SEQ.0.jpg
Olympus Pen FV, 2.0/70mm Zuiko
 
Thanks everyone. Very helpful input, all around. I am leaning towards the Pen-FV. The lens is trickier because although I see the benefit of the f1.4, I can't see a good enough deal within my budget for the two. So I'll aim for a FV+38mm f1.8 and see how it goes!
 
Ricoh said:
Assuming you've not yet handed a Pen F at the time of writing, when you do be careful advancing the film as it gets close to the last frame or two as it can be difficult to feel any resistance. If the film is taught, ie it's at the end, and you wind on irrespective not knowing, there's a risk or tearing the sprocket holes. I've done it once, but now I'm very careful and probably err on the safe side by stopping at frame 70, or 71 if I'm feeling lucky.
Click to expand...

I second that. I should have replied earlier on but the OG Pen-F with the gothic F can tear your film when you get towards the end of the roll. So when I am getting close to 70, I tend to be extra careful with winding.
 
48875518077_c9cf1b5ce3_k.jpg


Thanks everyone for your help. I bought a Pen FV that arrived yesterday. I shot "half" a roll (i.e 24 half-frame shots on a TriX 400 24 exp) this morning. This is my first experience shooting a meterless camera and I loved it. (I'm using a light meter app until my physical meter arrives).

The viewfinder is ... dimmer than I expected (I'm used to the FM3A's K3 screen) but it's fine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top