I find myself in a bit of a quandary. Please be gentle. I feel like a
wanker to even be asking these questions to this august forum, but here
goes. Skip has already heard some of this.
Those of you who have owned Nikon or Leica systems and given them up,
what prompted the switch to OM?
Those of you who still use Nikon or Leica alongside your OM, what makes
you pick up one rather than the other? What does each do best?
My OM-1MD has been more or less out of the equation for the last ten
years. I sold all my OM gear except the body and 50/1.8 lens when I was
told its meter was un-repairable. Now I find that is not necessarily
true! It is now on the way to John Hermanson to (hopefully) get its
meter fixed, which is prompting all this teeth-gnashing. Suddenly, I
could be using my beloved OM-1 again!
In a recent roll using incident metering, I was pleased with the
closer-focusing of the 50/1.8 Zuiko lens vs. the Nikon 50/1.8 Series E.
Image quality was comparable. I love the feel of the OM.
As far as SLR vs rangefinder goes, so far (in nine months of Leica
ownership) I've found I get better results for casual portraits and
close-ups with my Nikon FE2 and the 75-150 Series E. This is partly
because I don't have a 90mm for the Leica. This jives with conventional
wisdom about wide angles working well with rangefinders, telephotos
with SLRs. The images from the Summicrons (esp. the 35/2 ASPH) are
spectacular. The MP also feels great. Incredible "haptics" as Erwin
Putz says.
As far as Nikon MF vs. OM goes...I love the compactness and lightness
of the OM system. That's what drew me to the OM in 1976, when I traded
in my Minolta for the OM-1. The match needle metering is just so easy.
I got the FE2 hoping to approximate the OM-1 in that regard. Turns out
the FE2 is quite a bit more sophisticated and capable--offering AE,
plus TTL flash. The FG offers a full Program mode. THe FG is actually
about the same size and weight as the OM-1. I'm imagining image quality
with Zuiko lenses would be equal to the Nikons, but...different...than
the Leica's. It'd be hard to beat the Summicron 35/2 ASPH in richness,
bokeh, tonal graduation, sharpness, three dimensionality...you know,
that Leica thing they do so well.
Mind you, I could sell the Leica kit and finance a vacation to some
exotic place to actually _take_ photographs instead of talking about
photo gear.... We are in fact going to Australia in May, to meet my
wife's family for the first time. She grew up in northern Queensland,
sugar cane territory--Finch Hatton. The family now lives in Mackay.
It's going to be a huge photo opportunity--first time all of the
siblings will be together in ten years...but I want to avoid bringing
ALL my cameras...
My thoughts are to either...
-get the 90mm for the Leica and just take that kit.
or...
-forget about long lenses on the rangefinder, and carry the OM with the
75-150/4 I just got from Jim Couch for portraits, and use the MP for
everything else... (and forget about TTL flash in both cases...)
or...
-take the FG and FE2 with three lenses and SB-15
or...
-sell most of my Nikon gear (except the FG, which was my dad's), sell
the Leica kit, and get an OM-4ti, F280 flash, 21/3.5, 24 shift, 35/2,
50/1.2 and 85/2 to compliment my 50/1/8 and 75-150 zoom, and for the
trip to Australia, take the OM-1 and OM-4ti, F280, 21/3.5, 35/2, 50/1.2
and 85/2, and quit thinking so much.
There, I've said it.
Thanks for listening.
-Rob in Seattle
The olympus mailinglist olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: mailto:olympus-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
To contact the list admins: mailto:olympusadmins@xxxxxxxxxx?subject="Olympus
List Problem"
|