Why MicroFourThird (Olympus, Panasonic etc.) at all?

songura

Active Member
Is it wise to continue to us Olympus SLR?
I've been using Olympus SLRs for many years. I really love the cameras. But in recent years I sometimes ask myself if it is wise to use SLR any more. Because it seems Olympus and Zuiko have abandoned research and production of SLRs, and have turned their attention to digital cameras. Though I use "digital darkroom", I don't like digital cameras at all. They are only toies with plastics and IC boards, which start to lose their value right after your purchase. But, I doubt I could continue to get new SLR bodies and new lenses. Pity, really.
 

mattinasi

Well-Known Member
> Yes, it is very wise to continue to use your OM and Zuiko equipment! Wise, that is, if you enjoy it and like the results. As for myself, I am very happy shooting with my OM-1 and OM-2, and the Zuikos are fantastic. Why stop? The photos are great, the process a joy, I'll keep using my OM's, than you.

- marc
 

bdcolen

Well-Known Member
So let's see if I understand this - you chose your cameras based on their resale value? Gee, I chose mine based on whether they are the best tools to help me produce the images I want to produce. The reality is that we are unarguably at the end of what might be termed the Age of Film - which followed the Age of Glass Plates. Whether it will take five, 10, or 15 years for photography to go fully-digital, it WILL happen, and in terms of professional photography - pure "art" photography aside - we are just about there. So worrying about whether a camera is filled with chips and diodes is a bit silly at this point. The question is whether those chips and diodes will give YOU the image YOU require - and whether the body itself is tough enough to withstand the abuse you will give it. From my brief handling of the E-1 I'd say it's as tough as anything out there, and tougher than most.

B. D. Colen
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

andy_radcliffe

Active Member
Well, I combine the best of both worlds (as of course do lots of others)by continuing to use my OM system for image capture and then scanning the resulting negatives or transparencies and outputting digitally . Of course, the benefits of this method are that you still have the original film from which to produce chemical prints if you wish or, in the case of slides, to project.
No worries about possible future obselescence of storage media either. Film will always be readable.
As far as the lack of new OM system components goes - well I don't think that I have ever bought any major items new, apart from my first OM-1 (in 1973).Anyway, once you have a system that fills your needs it's not like you are out buying new items every day, is it?
 

songura

Active Member
Thanks for all advices. OK, I'll keep using my old SLRs. As matter of the fact, I'm loosing my eyesight and it is very difficult for me to use those digital cameras. When you use digital cameras you have to fumble small buttons, trying to make out what mode you use, and I can't see LCD cleraly. With old OM, I don't have to see which button I use.
 

andy_radcliffe

Active Member
Hi Songura,

You are not alone in this - I hate having to scroll through menus just to do something simple like change shutter speed or aperture. It sounds like you already have (in my opinion) the best of both the analogue and digital worlds. I hardly produce any "chemical"prints now - digital output does offer me real advantages.Really sorry to hear of your deteriorating eyesight though.
Best wishes,

Andy
 

andy_radcliffe

Active Member
I just thought that maybe I should answer the question "why Olympus?" Well, when I was twenty years old I saw the press reports from Photokina of the release of the M-1, and thought that this had to be the camera to own. As compact as a Leica rangefinder but with the advantages (to me) of being an SLR. As it was my 21st birthday the next year I dropped heavy hints to my parents.
Next year , I did get my camera - by then of course it was the OM-1, which I still have and use to this day. I didn't manage to get my M-1 until a couple of years ago. If only I'd been a year older I might have been in the position of owning one from new though!

Cheers,

Andy
 

iberger

Well-Known Member
Did Olympus actually sell an M-1? I got the impression that, as soon as they showed it at Photokina, Leica pressured them to change the name and that only OM-1,OM-2, etc. ever reached the market. And if that's the case, what is the "M-1" you got a couple of years ago?
 

mattinasi

Well-Known Member
> They made a small run of M-1 cameras, though I am not sure of the exact number. They are available from time to time at second-hand and collector stores. Typically, they are quite expensive my Olympus standards. The last one I saw was in mediocre condition for $900, thought I have seen them in MINT for around $1000 USD

- marc
 

andy_radcliffe

Active Member
Songura - you saw an M-1 at a second hand market and you didn't buy it!!??
Anyone who wants more M-1 information could take a look at
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

There just happens to a photo of my M-1 on there too!
You can see it here as well -(if you're interested)
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Cheers,

Andy.
 

iberger

Well-Known Member
[A slight correction to your Web page: The Leica M1 was NOT a rangefinder camera--it was the only Leica M without a rangefinder, as it was meant for use with the Visoflex reflex housing.]
 

mattinasi

Well-Known Member
This is getting off-topic for this thread, but one last post on the M-1: there is a nice one for sale ~ $650 at
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
(I have no affiliation, but I have purchased there before and was pleased). If you can find a nice M-System lens to go with it, you would have a very cool usable and collectible camera!

Cheers!
- marc
 

gjames52

Well-Known Member
Why Olympus? I chose the OM system, because it was a complete and intelligent system. When I release the shutter on my OM 2, I know what I will get, because the system was well designed and produced.

I do feel that Olympus let us down. Nikon, Cannon, others, and now Leica have supported there systems for there customers, with options to go digital and continue to produce their lenses.

The new Leica back is perhaps an avenue for Olympus to follow.

I would have welcomed an OM 6!
 
E

egraeme

why i chose my olyc3030z:

was doing a lot of camera mag and web research on digicams in my price range, which at the time was about $1000 U.S.

read a lot about both the oly c3030z and the nikon cp900/950/990(whatever it was at the time)

basically i just went down to my local ritz and played around with both of them. both seemed to be excellent cameras... tho i found the body style and menus more ME friendly on the oly by far.

so... voila... pretty simple eh? ;)

as for its resale value... well... im 24 and used to electronics being "worthless" in under a year. but id rather base my purchasing on presonal preference rather than what everyone ELSE thinks about it. *shrug*

to me, it was well worth the $1000 that i paid for it...*grumbles something about running out 10 minutes before ritz closed on xmas eve night to get it for himself*



~eG
 
D

dark_mist

I chose the OM system mainly for the accuracy of the spot metering available on the OM4Ti but also for the quality of the glass available. Of course it help if you know how to use spot metering rather than just rely on the camera to guess what you want with matrix or whatever.

Admittedly I'm using Tamron SP lenses now and they are pretty good but Zuiko lenses are sharp enough to cut yourself on. There is a wealth of macro and other close up stuff available and when I'm a bit richer I'll be buying up again. Also the Tamrons are a little fiddly when changing aperture.

I only got the OM30 as a back up in case my main camera jammed, but with Tamron lenses this isn't that important, but it is easier to use a system where the controls are largely in the same place.

I dream of buying an OM3 but apart from justifying the expense they are never available.
 

elmolise

Member
I bought my OM-1,because of its small size.Thats
the reason I chose Olympus. After years of learning how to use my Oly,I began to appreciate
it even more. I ended up buying an OM-4 that was
damaged. The original owner had no idea of its
worth and bought it for $100.00. I had all plans
to have it repaired,but circumstances beyond my
control caused me to lose both cameras, and several lenses,and other miscilanius(sic)equipment. Its something I don't talk about because it brings back unpleasant memories. I now own a Canon A1. I went from totaly manual,to totaly auto(I use it at aperture pref.) Well.....I hope I didn't bore anyone.
 

ed_b

Member
Hello, Fellow Olympus Users.
I just joined your forum today...Wonderful site -
I thought it interesting the 'why' Olympus 35mm.
I too, have dabbled with some digital work, but found myself going back to my OM2 N after nearly a 6-8 year hiatus...I had forgotten what fun and relaxation 'true' photography work is!
I started with a OM1 (mainly due to their size and lens - I couldn't afford and still can't a Hassleblad, but shoot an Kiowa 66). The OM1 was traded for the 2N, shortly after it's introduction and it has been my main camera ever since.
I've played with digital and it was the secondary design consideration for my home PC and I have been 'learning' about digital photography work the last 2-3 yrs. What drew me back to 35mm was cost-effectiveness' or 'more-camera-for-my-dollar'. The market for used 35mm items is staggering, simple due to the fact everybody is going digital. I came very close to trading in my 2N, but took a weekend off and did what I call 'serious picture taking'. I was hooked again, what can I say.
I recently added a OM4, some lens and I am out shooting again, and re-discovering 35mm photography. For me, this 'new' 4 is awesome and a beautiful piece of equipment. I've been shooting pictures nearly 40 yrs. And this design, even though it is what - 15 years old, shoots just as well as any new 35mm out there now (And I like the new stuff, don't get me wrong).
I think for many of 'us', camera user's it is a matter of preference and choice and what 'we' are used to. For me it has been Olympus. And the last factor is 'how-much-do-you-want-to-spend'...
For now, I'll continue to shoot with my Olympus System and enjoy the 35mm format. Perhaps, perhaps someday I'll invest in a 'true' digital system. But for now, my tried-n-true OM's will suffice. My children are all being 'learned' 35mm photography work. I think it important. My oldest daughter, in college is using her great-grandfather's older Minolta set-up. My 15 yr old, has my other AE 5, and my 11, was just given an old clunker Chinnon and he to is 'learning' to appreciate what God created for us to 'see'. And I have a 7 yr old, who likes this 'photography schuff' as he says.
For any of 'us', who like and enjoy photography do it...WHO care's what you use, huh.
And if you are lucky enough to have children - Take the time and teach them the world of photography. My grandfather did me and you'll give the world awhole new generation of photographers.
Personally, I'll stick with my OM System for now and enjoy 're-discovering' 35mm photography.
And my 'thank-you', for a wonderful site for 'us' Olympus people.
Ed Brown -
 

songura

Active Member
Conguatulations for coming back to old OM system. I was considering seriously to buy a digital camera last year. I compared digital pictures with film pictures. I see the quality of film pictures is still better than digital. Most these digi-pics are very soft and with fainted colours. Besides, with digital cameras taking picture is complicated process, and I can't see LCD clearly, fumbling the buttons is difficult. So I'll stick to my old OM4.
Our OM1, OM2, OM4 are very valueable, but digital cameras are like computers, in several years' time, they are nothing.
 

narsuitus

Active Member
“So let's see if I understand this - you chose your cameras based on their resale value? Gee, I chose mine based on whether they are the best tools to help me produce the images I want to produce.â€

B. D. Colen (Bdcolen),

Yes, some photographers who depend on photography for their livelihood have to take resale value into consideration when choosing their equipment. If they have been using a system (camera, lenses, backs, view screens, viewfinders, etc.) that has given them decades of use and high quality photos, it is difficult to replace it with new system that they may be forced to replace within a few years because the manufacturer has stopped supporting the old system and replaced it with an entirely new system.
 
Top