ONLYOLYBW@xxxxxxx wrote:
> I have been wondering if someone was going to run into this problem with the
> Beattie or the OM 2-13 or 2-4 screens in OM1 & 2's. Shipman advises we should
> not use the OM 1-5,6, or 7 in OM1 or 2' s in manual because of the difference
> in how they meter ref. pg. 66 1987 ed. I would think the same applies to
> useing the new OM & Beattie's.
mahlon.r.haunschild@xxxxxx wrote:
> I guess that it's possible to measure the difference in the 2-4
> screen-equipped-OM-2's meter reading against a Known Good Light Meter (we
> all have one of those laying around, right??) off of, say, a gray card, and
> dial in an appropriate ISO compensation. Has anyone tried this?
Yup,
though I didn't use an external light meter but the same body and lens
under the same (artificial) light conditions. The difference would have
produced 0.5 to 1 stop underexposure using the manual mode of my OM-2
(pre'78). The difference is not constant, depending on the position of
the lightsource(s) in the frame. But then, I'm in the auto mode most of
the time and the exposure correction dial gets a lot of use.
BTW, I found that light entering the viewfinder from the rear produces a
MUCH larger differences between indicated and 'true' exposure times.
An eye-cup might help, but I'm wearing glasses and haven't found the
right cup/lens combo on the used market yet. Anyone with a cup/-2lens
FS?
Cheers,
Soenke, Hamburg
< 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 >
|