Hi Jim,
The biggest leap both in concept and reality is from the OM-1 to OM-2.
With the electro-mechanical shutter comes battery dependence, but I believe
it's worth it. It gives you Off the Film (OTF) exposure control and TTL
flash in auto mode. You can bracket using the exposure compensation dial,
i.e., using the same stop throughout. That is frequently important to me if
I am stretching for the maximum DOF or if I want to use a favored stop.
The differences among all the OM's with electro-mechanical shutters are
mere details compared to this profound difference between the OM-1 and OM-2.
Secondly, it is probably the case that the OM-2/4 shutter-mirror-aperture
complex is smoother than an OM-1's. The differences appear to be
measurable and Gary Reese's lens tests tend to confirm that the OM-4 (and I
presume OM-2S) and even the OM2000 are smoother than the OM-1. Nor does
OM-1 mirror lock up ameliorate the situation. The self-timer on an OM-2S,
OM-4T, or OM2000, while not perfect, is more effective for producing
ideally sharp results.
I'm not sure of the exact differences between the meter in the OM-1 and,
say, OM-4Ti, but I think the OM-4Ti meter is better than the OM-1's. I am
comparing the OM-4Ti in straight auto mode to the OM-1. Aside from obvious
situations like backlighting, the OM-4Ti (and OM-2S) meter is seldom
fooled. I've got the brackets to prove it.
None of these reasons mean that the OM-1 is not satisfying or does not
produce excellent results. I don't like to be perceived as saying bad
things about the OM-1. But I find the electro-mechanical bodies a little
more useful and a little better when the film comes back.
Joel Wilcox
Iowa City, Iowa USA
< 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 >
|