Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] This is the first time I have posted questions...

Subject: Re: [OM] This is the first time I have posted questions...
From: "John A. Lind" <jlind@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 23:14:03 -0400
At 15:16 4/28/03, Richard Smith wrote:

1.  When might one want to lock up the mirror on an OM1, OM2, and OM2n?

The M-1, OM-1 and OM-1n are the only bodies with a "real" MLU. The others have a "pseudo" MLU that prefires the mirror when using the self-timer. Purpose in using one is reduction of vibration from mirror slap. Useful for high magnification macros and when using very long lenses. Astro-photographers consider it a *must-have* feature.

2. I see ads for lenses that claim "absolutely no oil on the blades," or "the diaphragm is oil free." What is the nature and cause of this problem that many Ebay sellers (especially) say they don't have?



3.  I know it depends, but should I buy a T32 or a T20?

Between the two I recommend the T-32 . . . higher power level (about one f-stop), three aperture settings in Normal-Auto (vs. two), reduced power mode and ability to tilt head upward (still no rotation though). All that said . . . my mainstay shoe mounts now are Metz 40 MZ-2 and Metz 40 MZ-3i with SCA-321 modules for TTL control (older SCA-320 module will also work). They have a little more power, allow selecting any aperture in Normal Auto, can rotate in addition to tilting, and have a secondary flash tube for about 20 0irect lighting when using bounce from main flash tube (can be switched on or of independent of tilt/rotation). A bit larger than the T-32 but about the same weight and similar lower profile design compared to "cobra" style shoe mount flashes. Including cost of SCA-320/321 module, they're about 2X the cost of a T-32 in similar condition on the used market. IMHO, the Metz 40 MZ series units are what Olympus should have done to advance the T-32 instead of the F280.

4. Ever hear of reversing a 50mm lens on my OM1 and using it for close up shots? Why in the world should this work?

Yes . . . haven't done it though and prefer using extension tubes, usually with the 85/2. Think of large image plane in space being mapped to a much, much smaller image plane on film. Now reverse a lens on the front of another one and you can move in extremely close to an object for a high magnification macro.

5. I am drawn to stark, contrasty, sharp black and white photos. What film should I use, Tri-X or Tmax?6. The Photoworks lab does OK with color, but doesn t develop and scan black and white film. Is there someone around who does this well and for a reasonable price?

Tri-X is noted for its comparatively wide latitude (in addition to good mid-tones, an interesting grain that isn't "harsh," and tolerates being "pushed"). Wide latitude = lower contrast . . . on the negative. IIRC, TMax has a narrower latitude and will create greater contrast on the negative. Note that even if you have a lower contrast negative, contrast grade selection for print material can crank up the contrast. Check out pricing for "real" B&W prints from full service pro labs near you.

7. Do you think there is a quality difference between the Om1 and Om2n, or are they all the same high quality?

Don't own a "2n" so cannot comment.

8.  Does Olympus still sell anything for the OM cameras?

OM system was completely discontinued.  IIRC it was end of 2002.

9.  What is the best way to clean a lens without damaging it?

Very carefully!  :-)
Too long for list posting.  See this web page:
  http://www.photo.net/learn/cleaning-cameras#Lenses
My tips:  remove crudmium in this order:
a.  Blowing off with *clean* air.
b.  Brushing off with *clean* brush.
c.  Then use cleaning fluid and a lens cloth.
Object is *not* to grind anything into the surface of the lens. IMHO abrasions (also called "cleaning marks") are *worse* than a minor scratch or nick. Heed instructions to put cleaning fluid onto a cleaning cloth! Puting fluid directly onto a lens can result in fluid getting inside the lens leaving residue rings inside the lens when it dries.

10.  Why is a 135mm/2.8 a telephoto lens, whereas a 135mm 4.5 is a macro lens?

The 135/4.5 is only intended for use with the telescopic auto tube or bellows. Its focusing helical is only for fine focusing adjustment with coarse focusing performed using the telescopic tube or bellows. By design in conjunction with a telescopic tube or bellows, it's inherently a slower lens. Note that even if one used a 135/2.8 with enough extension tubes to achieve the .5X magnification of telescopic tube/bellows with the 135/4.5, there would be significant light reduction (spreading of image circle) that would make it effectively and significantly slower also.

11. If Ebay is any measure, are prices for Olympus OM cameras, lenses, and accessories skyrocketing? Is this something we can expect to continue?

Don't know that eB*y is any measure of real value or appreciation/depreciation trends. Prices have fluctuated there for some time. They go up and down periodically. May have taken a slight bump with discontinuation but I don't anticiapte that lasting very long. The OM system is a **user** system, not a "glass case" collector one . . . although I've seen a few sellers try to advertise items as if they're selling "Like New" Leica LTM or M items. Some of the auction posting I've read are quite entertaining about alleged rarity . . . including the Legend of the Secret Wyoming Factory!
  http://johnlind.tripod.com/omwyfactory.html

-- John


< 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 >


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz