Not after Dr. Hermanson fixes 'em, Chris. [?] On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 3:41 PM, Chris Crawford <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > wrote: > That screws up the metering in the OM-1 and it messes up manual metering > and > the finder's meter display in auto mode, though auto exposures are still > correct on the OM-2. > > > -- > Chris Crawford > Photography & Graphic Design > Fort Wayne, Indiana > 260-747-5101 > > http://www.chriscrawfordphoto.com My portfolio > > http://blog.chriscrawfordphoto.com My latest work! > > > > On 7/9/10 3:36 PM, "Rick Beckrich" <rbeckrich@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > A SOLUTION FOR THE BUDGET MINDED > > > > (At least those of us who can't budget for either a 3 or 4ti) > > Intall a OM 2 series screen or a Beattie in your ON -1n or 2n (or 1 or 2) > > and you will experience Dawids revalation too. > > > > Happy with my 1 & 2 "twos" > > > > Rick > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 2:32 PM, Chris Crawford < > chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > >> wrote: > > > >> I've been using a pair of Leica M6 bodies with 35mm and 50mm lenses for > a > >> while now. Haven't touched my OM-4T bodies in months. > >> > >> I know the popular notion is that RF cameras are great for wideangles, > but > >> I > >> agree with Dawid that they're not. Leicas have built in finders set up > for > >> 28mm or 35mm as the widest focal length (depending on the model you have > >> and > >> what finder options you got), so you need accessory finders for wider > >> lenses. This is a pain because you have to look through the normal > finder > >> to > >> focus using the rangefinder, then switch to the accessory finder to > compose > >> the photo. For wider lenses, I think an SLR is best and as Dawid said, > the > >> 2-series focusing screens in an OM-4T or 3T are incredible. > >> > >> I actually think that 50mm is the ultimate rangefinder lens. The > framelines > >> float in the middle of a large finder allowing you to easily see what's > >> going on outside the frame, and the projected framelines make it easier > for > >> me to line up horizontal and vertical lines in buildings to allow me to > >> hold > >> the camera level, something I have a hard time with sometimes with SLRs. > >> > >> The REAL difference between the OM-4T/3T system and the Leica though is > >> shutter release lag. The mirror in the OM-4/4T/3/3T/2sp bodies is > >> excruciatingly slow moving. I find it near impossible to capture > fleeting > >> candid moments with my OM bodies, and have missed literally thousands of > >> shots because of it. The Leica fires INSTANTLY and it has improved my > >> street/candid type photography a million times. Other SLRs are not as > bad > >> as > >> the Oms; I have an old Nikon F4 and its near as fast as a Leica, maybe > as > >> fast. I have no trouble shooting street with it, but the damned thing is > >> HUGE and HEAVY. The Leicas are huge and heavy enough compared to the > OMs, > >> I'm not willing to carry anything bigger. The Shutter lag issue is > really > >> the main thing keeping me using my Leicas over my OM-4T bodies now. Its > >> revolutionized my work in a way I never guessed possible, and I normally > >> don't think gear matters that much. The rangefinder has a lot of > >> limitsations. It sucks for wides as Dawid said and it sucks for long > >> lenses. > >> I really think my Leicas work best for 50mm and good/ok for 35mm but > that's > >> it. Within that limitation, they can deliver fast action shots better > than > >> anything. > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Chris Crawford > >> Fine Art Photography > >> Fort Wayne, Indiana > >> 260-424-0897 > >> > >> http://www.chriscrawfordphoto.com My portfolio > >> > >> http://blog.chriscrawfordphoto.com My latest work! > >> > >> > >> > >> On 7/9/10 1:58 PM, "Dawid Loubser" <dawidl@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >>> > >>> On 09 Jul 2010, at 7:37 PM, Ken Norton wrote: > >>> > >>>>> For a while there, I really though life couldn't get better than an > >>>>> OM-1 > >>>>> for my needs (an all-manual camera) but boy was I wrong. And it's > >>>>> actually got nothing to do with the multi-spot metering. > >>>> > >>>> 1/2000, right? > >>> > >>> 1/2000s is great, yes. But oh my, that viewfinder... There are many > >>> subtle differences between the design of the OM-1/2 viewfinder and > >>> the OM-3/4. OM-1/2 is bigger, yes. But oh my, the 3Ti/4Ti has the most > >>> gorgeous, accurate-focusing, flare-free, bright, crisp viewfinder > >>> ever made by man. > >>> > >>> And yes, I have looked through a Leica R8/R9 viewfinder before. > >>> A 3Ti/4Ti with 2-series screen offers a viewfinder experience which > >>> is superior in every way for composition and focusing to any other > >>> camera, including rangefinder cameras. It's simply... amazing. > >>> > >>> I find it funny how one is supposed to be "more accurate" / > >>> "quicker focusing" with wide angles and a rangefinder, but > >>> my 21mm F2 with this viewfinder is simply apparently as bright > >>> as what the subject seems with the naked eye. It's completely > >>> unbelievable. And the "feel" one develops for the focusing through > >>> the ultra-high-resolution focusing screen simply opens possibilities > >>> not possible with any rangefinder. > >>> > >>> I know I seem very Anti-rangefinder, but I was seriously, seriously > >>> considering an M-series rangefinder with a fast 24mm or 21mm as my > >>> "definitive" 35mm film camera. I tried some out. Verdict: There is > >>> simply no comparison, a 3Ti is superior in every respect except for > >>> greater noise and viewfinder blackout. Those are, simply put, the only > >>> reasons to use a rangefinder in my opinion. > >>> > >>> The Olympus Wides, especially the 21mm F2, are smaller, more versatile, > >>> vignette less, and 95% optically as good as the Leica M lenses. For > >>> hand-held photography, you will never see a technical difference. > >>> > >>> The 3Ti has imparted a kind of "ultimate pleasure" in terms of the > >>> OM system to me. I am re-discovering the wonder of the lenses as I > >>> can now, for the first time, truly "see" the excellence and the > >>> character of the lenses through this wonderful viewfinder. > >>> > >>> > >>>> With auto-exposure, life is a lot simpler and easier. But how a manual > >>>> camera affects me directly is I am constantly monitoring the light and > >>>> seeing what it is doing. This greater awareness of light is > >>>> translating into better pictures because I end up seeing things I > >>>> normaly don't see. Let me try to explain: > >>>> > >>>> 1. Photographer with auto-everything camera sees subject. Photographer > >>>> with auto-everything camera photographs subject. > >>>> > >>>> 2. Photographer with manual camera sees subject. Photographer with > >>>> manual camera sees light. Photographer with manual camera uses light > >>>> as part of the composition which usually requires relocation and/or > >>>> exposure modification. Photographer photographs subject with improved > >>>> light. > >>> > >>> > >>> 3. Photographer learns that if he uses an incident light meter all the > >>> time, > >>> he gets 100x better at "reading the light" (and ultimately no longer > >>> needing a light meter for 95% of situations) than what any in-camera > >>> meter > >>> will teach him :-) > >>> > >>> all the best, Ken - > >>> > >>> Dawid > >> > >> > >> -- > >> _________________________________________________________________ > >> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus > >> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/ > >> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/ > >> > >> > > > -- > _________________________________________________________________ > Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus > Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/ > Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/ > >
-- _________________________________________________________________ Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/ Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/ |
