[legendofkane]

What I mean is that compared to the mechanism of a Leica M3 to the Olympus om-1 is course, the M3 was like Silk. But then again they had hand fitted brass parts. It was one of the smoothest systems for winding film I've ever felt I'm just not into Rangefinder cameras

[LesDMess]

What I mean is that compared to the mechanism of a Leica M3 to the Olympus om-1 is course, the M3 was like Silk. But then again they had hand fitted brass parts. It was one of the smoothest systems for winding film I've ever felt I'm just not into Rangefinder cameras

I haven't opened up and completely disassembled any of mine so I can't say for certain how well engineered one is compared to another. I would guess that rangefinders probably have less action internally then SLRs? I know that my OM-1 & 2 have a noticeably smoother film advance then my OM-3 & 4 but again I don't know if that means the latter two are less well engineered then the former two.

[legendofkane]

I haven't opened up and completely disassembled any of mine so I can't say for certain how well engineered one is compared to another. I would guess that rangefinders probably have less action internally then SLRs? I know that my OM-1 & 2 have a noticeably smoother film advance then my OM-3 & 4 but again I don't know if that means the latter two are less well engineered then the former two.

I have always loved the om4 but never did get one, I think I love mechanical more than anything else which is why I loved the Pentax k1000, a light meter of course is acceptable inconvenient. And you're right rangefinders probably don't have the internals of a SLR nor do they have the classic look at my opinion not to say they don't look good.

[LesDMess]

Then instead of the OM-4 maybe you would like the OM-3 better - multi-spot metering but fully mechanical when batteries die.

[legendofkane]

Then instead of the OM-4 maybe you would like the OM-3 better - multi-spot metering but fully mechanical when batteries die.

thanks for the information as I did not know that about the om3, matter fact I rarely even see one for sale

[LesDMess]

Fortunately the Olynpus OM single digit series was easy to keep track of since there were only 4. OM-1 & 3 had fully mechanical shutters while OM-2 & 4 had aperture priority.



Basically the OM-3 & 4 got 1/2000 shutter speed, sophisticated multi spot metering and built-in diopter control. The viewfinder magnifications shrank from 0.92X to 0.84 with the OM-3 & 4.

[legendofkane]

Fortunately the Olynpus OM single digit series was easy to keep track of since there were only 4. OM-1 & 3 had fully mechanical shutters while OM-2 & 4 had aperture priority.



Basically the OM-3 & 4 got 1/2000 shutter speed, sophisticated multi spot metering and built-in diopter control. The viewfinder magnifications shrank from 0.92X to 0.84 with the OM-3 & 4.

See, I would love to have the1/2000th as the only upgrade to the original and thankful for the larger view. I still prefer it over My Nikon FM2, still waiting on my 1.8 lens.. it was in a city 25 miles away from me ready to be delivered to my post office when I get a notice at night that now it is 1029 miles away in Des Moines Iowa and not in North Carolina anymore. So until USPS get straight I won't order any more accessories, not even portra film that I want to try. So sad.

[Astro-Baby]

I had an OM4 back when they were still being made. I started with an OM1 which was my first pro camera, bought a second one later on. Much later I moved to Nikon but one day in a moment of madness and feeling like I would maybe get some of the old magic back with a return to an OM I shelled out for an OM4 Ti.
Totally ended up hating it, it ate batteries like Smints. I always found its metering a bit suspect. Just ended up selling it off cheap in an part ex deal for another Nikon.

These days I have in the collection a pair of restored OM1s and its weird how I always get better pics with them than with anything else.....was the same back in the day.

[legendofkane]

I had an OM4 back when they were still being made. I started with an OM1 which was my first pro camera, bought a second one later on. Much later I moved to Nikon but one day in a moment of madness and feeling like I would maybe get some of the old magic back with a return to an OM I shelled out for an OM4 Ti.
Totally ended up hating it, it ate batteries like Smints. I always found its metering a bit suspect. Just ended up selling it off cheap in an part ex deal for another Nikon.

These days I have in the collection a pair of restored OM1s and its weird how I always get better pics with them than with anything else.....was the same back in the day.

I will admit I was in the nikon phase for a while, and fm2 in the F3 HP. Great cameras but it just didn't feel the same to be honest as with the Olympus. As a matter of fact I found a premotor drive body for $56 like mine in very good condition, serial number in the early 200,000. $56 I believe. The only thing that was wrong with it was an erratic light meter which I believe is the nylon screw has probably come loose and letting the contact move around in the battery chamber, which is an easy fix

[LesDMess]

Since I personally prefer spot metering, getting the OM-4 was really a no brainer as it provided spot, multispot, hilight, shadows and memory. I use single spot mostly as I know what the latitude is of the films I use.




Then they wrapped it in Titanium and gave it full flash synchronization up to 1/2000 speed but only when using the F280 flash.



I've tested this up to 1/2000 and it works as advertized.

The OM-3 was a gamble as it was listed by KEH "AS-IS, does not work, for parts only" but I bought it anyway and it turned out to be 100% functional and in very good cosmetic condition. I picked it up since I hardly see it and was hoping that whatever ails it that it would be fixable by John Hermanson (Camtech Photo Services) who I think is the Olympus equivalent to Eric Hendickson.
The OM-3 also has the the same metering and flash as the OM-4 but with a fully manual shutter control.

[legendofkane]

It is a handsome camera and even though it's starting to get more and more Electronics inside it is still very desirable. I believe that's where it started to Branch outside the fully manual camera so of course, but a gorgeous piece of workmanship none the less

[Astro-Baby]

I will admit I was in the nikon phase for a while, and fm2 in the F3 HP. Great cameras but it just didn't feel the same to be honest as with the Olympus. As a matter of fact I found a premotor drive body for $56 like mine in very good condition, serial number in the early 200,000. $56 I believe. The only thing that was wrong with it was an erratic light meter which I believe is the nylon screw has probably come loose and letting the contact move around in the battery chamber, which is an easy fix

I kind of liked the badass look of the Nikon F, especially with the weird asymetrical meter head. When I. Ought into the F they were already obsolete but as the F2 was the one that people were upgrading to the originals were plentiful and cheap second hand. Believe it or not at the dawn of digital I sold both bodies and the lenses for a paltry £286 in p/ex for a pair of Canon D30s from recall. No one wanted them.

Have gone back to film and acquired most of the cams I used to shoot with I still feel more at home with the OMs though. The Minoltas are sleeker, the Nikons more robust and better made ( probably ) but theres just something about the OM. I like its simple VF. Just a meter needle and a HUGE view.

I have read that Matani was not happy with it and felt the engineering team had cut too many corners. I always found them reliable bavk in the day and my two were owned by an astro imgare in Alaska so when I got them they had been used for years under dark skies in Alaska...They ran ok but the meters were out of whack. I think that says something for reliability though.

[legendofkane]

I kind of liked the badass look of the Nikon F, especially with the weird asymetrical meter head. When I. Ought into the F they were already obsolete but as the F2 was the one that people were upgrading to the originals were plentiful and cheap second hand. Believe it or not at the dawn of digital I sold both bodies and the lenses for a paltry £286 in p/ex for a pair of Canon D30s from recall. No one wanted them.

Have gone back to film and acquired most of the cams I used to shoot with I still feel more at home with the OMs though. The Minoltas are sleeker, the Nikons more robust and better made ( probably ) but theres just something about the OM. I like its simple VF. Just a meter needle and a HUGE view.

I have read that Matani was not happy with it and felt the engineering team had cut too many corners. I always found them reliable bavk in the day and my two were owned by an astro imgare in Alaska so when I got them they had been used for years under dark skies in Alaska...They ran ok but the meters were out of whack. I think that says something for reliability though.

you're right, that does speak loads of reliability and workmanship. If my meter ever stopped working and it was not because of the contact of the battery I would probably try to snip the needle off and then use a handheld light meter. I will be OCD if I saw the meter and I knew it wasn't working so if I can cut it back which I believe I could I would be fine with that.

[LesDMess]

It is a handsome camera and even though it's starting to get more and more Electronics inside it is still very desirable. I believe that's where it started to Branch outside the fully manual camera so of course, but a gorgeous piece of workmanship none the less

That's why I think the OM-3 is the best of both worlds - it is a completely manual camera sans batteries, but with batteries it has the most sophisticated metering system among all manual cameras except the Pentax LX.



I particularly appreciate the complete teardowns conducted when they used to review these lovely pieces of industrial art -> Anatomy of the OM-3 & 4

---------- Post added 12-30-20 at 01:04 PM ----------

I kind of liked the badass look of the Nikon F, especially with the weird asymetrical meter head. When I. Ought into the F they were already obsolete but as the F2 was the one that people were upgrading to the originals were plentiful and cheap second hand. Believe it or not at the dawn of digital I sold both bodies and the lenses for a paltry £286 in p/ex for a pair of Canon D30s from recall. No one wanted them.

Ah, the D30 . . . the beginning of resolution testing . . . participated in many heated arguments back in the day . . . when a pro photog declared that the D30 could outresolve an Imacon scanned 35mm Fuji Provia 100 . . . those were the days . . .

Clearly the Nikon F was a product of it's time and being able to adapt was critical. Clearly function over form . . .



Of course these days with films exceedingly generous latitude it is so easy to shoot daylight scenes without the need for metering.

---------- Post added 12-30-20 at 01:05 PM ----------

you're right, that does speak loads of reliability and workmanship. If my meter ever stopped working and it was not because of the contact of the battery I would probably try to snip the needle off and then use a handheld light meter. I will be OCD if I saw the meter and I knew it wasn't working so if I can cut it back which I believe I could I would be fine with that.

That is clearly one way I hadn't considered!

[Sam_I_am]

Here is a link to the discussion thread when I purchased my OM-1. It came with an OM-2 and OM-10. All from the original owner.

Hopefully I can get the seal kits this coming month and take them for a spin. Mine did not come with the nice little plug for the flash port, and with the wear mark you could tell it had the flash mount, so I have a replacement on its way.

What is the plural form of Olympus? - PentaxForums.com