Hi folks:
Like Richard I am also new to the list; seeing how many OM fans there are
here (and discovering I am actually part of a cult group of Zuikoholics and
OM fans ;-) ... it is like opening the doors to heaven: an amazing wealth of
technical and practical insight. I still have the OM1 my parents bought in
1976 (along with much pocket moneys worth of OM2n / OM4Ti, motors and nifty
Zuiko lenses).
Please accept my humble contribution to Q 1, 4 and 7 (although possibly
repeating other answers / they are all so qualified :))
> > 1. When might one want to lock up the mirror on an OM1, OM2, and OM2n?
And
> > how is this done?
>
> Mirror lockup might help reduce vibration, aiding sharpness particularly
at
> long shutter speeds. However I think only the OM-1 (and OM-1n) have mirror
> lockup.
Correct, only the OM1 can lock-up its mirror manually with a switch on the
front. The OM2 locks the mirror at the beginning of the self-timer, but if
the purpose is to limit vibration (for macro / long lense / long shutter
speed) and you do not have a very heavy tripod, it might still cause
vibration. For absolutely vibration free photography under these
circumstances use the OM1 with a trigger cable or a Winder / Motor with
remote control cable.
_______
> > 4. Ever hear of reversing a 50mm lens on my OM1 and using it for close
up
> > shots? Why in the world should this work?
>
> In theory the reversed lens is working closer to the optimized distance
for
> light rays to travel through it in that direction. Many macro subjects are
> flat, and the reversed lens is optimized for rendering a flat plane at
~46mm
> distance from the rear element of the lens. A real macro lens is much more
> versatile for this, though.
I used to play with it a lot, it really works. You can simply hold the lens
on backwards and move close to the object (really close). Physical distance
is then the only way to focus on the subject.
______
> > 7. Do you think there is a quality difference between the Om1 and Om2n,
or
> > are they all the same high quality?
>
> I think the OM-1 and OM-2 were built to about the same quality level (damm
> good). IMO, the OM-1n and OM-2n were probably as good as any OM cameras
> Olympus built. They just have a (non-scientific very subjective) 'feel'
> about their workings that even the OM-4T doesn't quite match. But that's
> just MY opinion!
I agree with Jim and others, BUT obviously the OM2 is a more fragile camera
design in the sense that it has more electronics. The OM1 mechanical shutter
can operate at all shutter speeds without batteries (if you know your
lighitng), the OM2 locks up the mirror if batteries are low. The advantage
of the OM2 is of course that it can be used for 'snap-shots' with automatic
exposure, the OM1 is more for 'raw' photography with plenty of time.
Note for the OM-10 to 40's: as Chuck Norcutt points out these are less
solid. This can amongst other things be seen by the fact that they only take
the 2.5fps Winders, not the 5fps Motor drives (which would smash their
mirrors and shutter curtains over time).
Be very careful if you buy used motors. The control pack batteries may be
mishandled and do not charge properly or run out of juice quickly.
Yours
Jakob
< 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 >
|