Unfortunately, you can't make the E-1 any smaller but there's nothing to
prevent you from pre-focusing it. In fact, the OM Zuiko 18 or 21 would
make a good walkaround lens (36 or 42mm equiv.) pre-set to f/5.6 or f/8
and then set at the hyperfocal or a near hyperfocal focusing distance.
You can use the OM's focusing scale for hyperfocal setting as long as
you use the scale at two stops wider. eg: if you have the 21mm mounted
on the E-1 and set at f/8 the actual hyperfocal distance is approx. 11
feet and giving a closest focus of 5-1/2 feet. But to use the OM scale
you'd have to consider the OM hyperfocal scale as being read as though
set to f/4. Probably easier to set the hyperfocal distance first as
though using an OM and then close down two stops.
Chuck Norcutt
Ken Norton wrote:
> Have I mentioned lately just how much I love shooting with the OM system?
>
> A couple weeks ago we went for a drive the day after a major snowstorm and
> the sun was out for a little bit. Temperatures were WAY below freezing and a
> strong wind was blowing. Out came the OM-3Ti, MD2, 35-80, 24/2.8, 50/3.5,
> 100/2.8 and 200/4. The entire kit nestled up nicely in my smallest camera
> bag. Film used was Provia 100F.
>
> The subfreezing temperatures were no match for the 3Ti and the scenery was
> quite pretty.
>
> A couple of days later, I shot pictures of an event with the OM-2S and
> 35/2.8 lens with Fujifilm 400 film. Nothing else, just that setup.
>
> Completely different configurations--one rather buff, the other petite, but
> one system. The ability to mix-and-match equipment for specific applications
> and working methods is one of the brilliant aspects of the OM system. Nearly
> every item works perfectly with every other item no matter the vintage,
> model or class.
>
> An OM body with the 35/2.8 is very, very small these days and the
> wide-normal lens gives me the ability to get closer to people and the camera
> is so small and "quaint" that it is disarming. When shooting the E-1 with
> battery grip. 14-54 lens and T45 flash, people see you coming a mile off and
> the mere presence of that monstrosity changes the environment. An OM body
> with MD2, 35-80 and T45 has a similar influence on the environment but
> because it somehow looks different than the black blobs of today I seem to
> be able to actually get shots that digital doesn't afford me, but that might
> be more a function of the speed of operation as I can prefocus the OM. It's
> still a monstrosity. Even the sound of the OM is so different than today's
> cameras that the soft low-frequency kerrwhump of the cloth shutter seems to
> relax people.
>
> I like the OM system a lot. It's home to me. It's the baseline of
> photographic equipment which I compare all else to. I know that for many
> people, this is wrongheaded but it's just the way I am. When looking at new
> equipment, I see where the evolutionary improvements in so many areas (and
> for some things, it is such an improvement over the old-technology as to be
> silly), but I just can't get over the fact that the mix-and-match and
> scalability is compromised.
>
> Olympus wasn't alone in this aspect. Nikon, Canon, Pentax, and Minolta all
> had scalable systems--some more scalable than others, but Olympus was my
> choice back in January of 1986 and exactly 24 years later I'm still in love
> with it. Granted, many piece-parts have come and gone through the years, but
> amazingly enough one of my first two lenses and my original camera body
> remain in heavy use. (The second lens was mistakenly sold and then a
> substitute was acquired several years later). Next year will be the silver
> anniversary for this silver-nosed one and I'm still enjoying the system like
> I did the first year--probably more because I know why I choose to use it.
>
> AG Schnozz
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|