Matt,
The Trip 35 has a fixed (non removable lens). You
should be able to find OM lenses easily on Eb*y using
simple search.
or visit KEH.com or woodmerecamera.com (both are less
risky).
--- Matthew Granger <matthewcharlesgranger@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
>
> Another question, relating to this link:
>
>
http://cgi.ebay.com.au/olympus-trip-35-camera-1-28-f-40mm-lense_W0QQitemZ220166924034QQihZ012QQcategoryZ15239QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
>
> Anyone know if the lens that is on this olympus trip
> 35 would be OM
> compatible??
>
> matt
>
>
> On 09/11/2007, Chuck Norcutt
> <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > You need to differentiate strongly between Olympus
> OM mount film cameras
> > (manual focus, mostly mechanical and first
> released in 1973) and the
> > more modern Olympus 4/3 mount digital cameras
> announced starting with
> > the E-1 in 2003... some 30 years later.
> >
> > Only independent lens makers such as Tamron,
> Tokina, Vivitar, Soligor
> > and a host of others made OM mount lenses besides
> Olympus. The Olympus
> > OM mount was considered proprietary and no other
> manufacturers ever made
> > OM mount camera bodies. The 4/3 mount, on the
> other hand, is considered
> > an "open" standard. Not free but you can get the
> specs and build your
> > own if you like. Leica and Panasonic also build
> 4/3 mount cameras and
> > lenses and since the 4/3 mount is a standard their
> 4/3 mount lenses will
> > also fit Olympus 4/3 bodies and vice-versa.
> >
> > All camera mounts have what's called a
> "registration distance". This is
> > the distance where the lens comes to infinity
> focus behind the base of
> > the lens flange or the distance from the camera's
> lens flange to the
> > surface of the film or sensor. In the case of 4/3
> bodies this distance
> > is rather short compared to an OM body or 1/2
> dozen other contemporary
> > film camera bodies such as Nikon. Since the OM
> registration distance is
> > longer than the 4/3 body it's possible to build a
> mechanical adapter to
> > join the disparate bayonet mounts while still
> having enough room to
> > spare that the OM lens can still reach infinity
> focus on the 4/3 body.
> > The same goes for Nikon mount lenses and some
> others.
> >
> > But this most definitely does not work in reverse.
> You can't put a 4/3
> > lens on an OM body since its registration distance
> is not long enough
> > for the lens to focus on the film at infinity.
> And even if you could
> > the lens isn't designed to provide an image circle
> large enough to cover
> > 35mm film.
> >
> > Chuck Norcutt
> >
> >
> > Matthew Granger wrote:
> > > So the correct term for the OM style mount is
> bayonet mount M-1?
> > >
> > > Also, I heard that other brands (maybe Leica?)
> make lenses that fit onto
> > OM
> > > or Olympus digital. Can anyone tell me where to
> get info on this?
> > >
> > > matt
> >
> > ==============================================
> > List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> > List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> > ==============================================
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Matt
> -----------------------------------
> There are 3 secrets to success:
> - always keep your eyes and ears open,
> - never share all that you know.
>
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|