How romantic ... Why don't you send this at Olympus Headquarter (pr_dept) ?
Jim Terazawa
>
> Ah, don't be mislead by the header. <g>
>
> A small series of posts last week (OM Elegance) dealt with an interesting
> factor in the OM's appeal. I grew up in a household where photography and
> cameras were taken seriously. I devoured the Modern Photography magazines
> and dreamed of one day owning an OM-1 or even an OM-2. I'm 32 now, so that
> means that Olympus' advertising campaign had a direct affect of me. I
> couldn't afford one then, but SOMEDAY I was going to get one.
>
> My Dad's cameras included a Crown Graphic, Argus C2, Argus C3, Voigtlander,
> a dead Exacta slr (waistlevel viewfinder), and finally a Nikkormat. I tore
> that Exacta apart numerous times trying to get it to work, but the fact is
> it never was designed to work in the first place!
>
> By the time I was eight, I was using the Crown Graphic and knew every
> control by heart. At night I'd read and reread every article about every SLR
> made. I knew that the ultimate cameras to have were the Olympus OM series
> or a Canon A1. Nikons were nice, but woefully out of reach of mere mortals.
> I never thought twice about them again. Pentax just seemed like a "me too"
> type of camera company and the articles about the lens quality just scared
> me off.
>
> Age 10: Paper route income. #1 priority was the 10-speed bicycle! Second
> priority was getting a camera. I purchased a used Yashica 35GSN rangfinder
> camera. I even got the lousy accessory lenses that screwed on. I learned
> so much about photography with this camera and shot many hundreds of rolls
> of film on it. Eventually, I got a second one. They served me well for
> almost 12 years, but my heart was never with them.
>
> College years. I was working at McDonalds, going to college and being bit
> by the photography bug something fierce. I trot on by Radium Photo
> (Muskegon Michigan) and there sits a used OM-2S and a zillion lenses. Some
> guy had just purchased the camera outfit and promptly lost his job. The
> camera store bought it all back for 50 cents on the dollar. (ouch). They
> also had a Canon A1 sitting there. Decisions, decisions. For the first
> time in my life I actually looked through the viewfinder of an OM camera. I
> was hooked! The A1 couldn't stand up to the 2S. I bought the camera on the
> spot along with a 100/2.8 lens. The following week (next paycheck) I bought
> a 35/2.8 lens. This camera only had two rolls of film run through it by the
> first owner. I saved almost $200 over an unused one sitting in the showcase
> next to it.
>
> I go back home and dig out the piles of MP magazines and re-read every
> article on the OM cameras. I have entire passages memorized I think. One
> article in particular was the lens comparison with Nikon. Herbert Keppler
> took an Olympus outfit and a Nikon outfit and did identical photographs with
> both cameras and then let everybody compare the slide sheets of the two
> cameras. (He didn't indicate which was which). The only variations of note
> were caused by metering--of which the Olympus was better.
>
> To support my habit I started working part-time at Radium Photo (kinda like
> a drug addict working in the herion lab). I purchased tons of camera
> equipment (at discount) and shot even more tonnage of film. The more I used
> it, the more I became aware of the geniousness behind the design. Canon
> came out with the EOS line and I eagerly awaited the development of the
> OM-5. The OM-5 never came. Yes, I've been disappointed, but have never
> been disappointed with my stash of equipment.
>
> I bought an IS-1 (now using an IS-3). These electronic marvels are amazing.
> I can do certain types of photography with the IS-3 that I can't with the
> OMs. But is my heart in it? How do you fall in love with something that
> you know will be outdated in a year or two? The OM-1 is a timeless camera.
> IS-1? Ya right.
>
> I just sold my OM-2md to a friend at work. Bidding farewell is a hard thing
> to do. Although it was my least favorite OM, it is still an OM. Now I am
> sending off my OM-1 and 2S to John for repairs/overhaul. As I pack the box
> and place the bodies in the foam, I am struck by the lightness and beauty of
> the cameras. These bodies are made of metal! The OM cameras were designed
> and built in the heyday of mechanical SLRs and represent the ultimate in SLR
> design.
>
> The Olympus OM-1 is the seductive lady in the love affair with photography.
> How can you describe the elegance, the simplicity, the smoothness and the
> perfect form? The OM-1 allows you to return to your roots, to simpler
> times, to the basics of photography, to the love of light. Nothing to get
> in your way, nothing to fail, nothing to distract you from your mission.
>
> Sometimes photography is like writing a love letter. I use a computer at
> work for writing articles, business correspondance and of course emails, but
> for a love letter to my wife, I use a pen and paper. Photography with a
> manual camera, with no motor drive and maybe with a single lens is like
> using a pen and paper. Slowing down, becoming one with your subject,
> thinking about the composition and just being patient. The love comes
> through in the pictures.
>
> The memories of my childhood, falling in love with photography, and becoming
> enamured by a camera. Will I ever abandon the OM line for another? I will
> get something else like a Nikon someday, but I could never abandon the one
> that brought me here.
>
> The Olympus OM-3T and OM-4T probably represent the end of an era of cameras.
> There will never be another metal bodied non-AF camera ever designed. Lieca
> or Contax may do something, but will there ever be another revolutionary
> design? No. There really can't be.
>
> I send off my OM bodies now to be cared for and prepared for many more years
> of use. In the meantime, I will miss them.
>
> Ken Norton
>
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|