1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Switching camera brands - would you??

Discussion in 'Weekly Poll' started by Damien_Demolder, Sep 3, 2007.

  1. parisian

    parisian Well-Known Member

    I agree Nick, the big quality shift has occurred in wide angle zooms but as for the 50m lenses there hasn't been a great need to improve anyway has there?
     
  2. Benchista

    Benchista Which Tyler

    Indeed not. That said, Leica have made some progress, of course - not that the old lenses were bad. ;)
     
  3. Benchmark

    Benchmark Well-Known Member

    I suspect that most of us would be far more likely to change brands if we could still use our lenses and accessories - as we did when most lenses had a 42 mm screw fitting.

    I started out with a bad tempered Practica, which regularly jammed mid-film for no reason at all, and then progressed to 35 mm Mamiya and Yashica bodies before settling with Pentax for about tweny years.

    Ironically, my affair with Olympus started when I needed a camera to fit onto my Nikon Microscope, with interchangeable focusing screens and spot metering. I bought a used OM2SP for the microscope, but soon feel under the spell of Zuiko, and bought my OM4Ti.

    I am happy with all of my current systems, and would not consider changing any of them just for a single improvement. But if there was a system that offered all round improvements I might just be tempted.....

    I have never owned a Nikon camera (even though I have a Nikon Microscope and film scanner), but there is something about that FM3a.........

    Having said that, I bought a mint condition 35 mm f2.0 lens for my OM4Ti recently, and I just cannot put it down! :D

    Sometimes I think it is better to rediscover a lost love than to start all over again.
     
  4. Benchista

    Benchista Which Tyler

    Nice, that 35mm f2 - mine is cosmetically pretty tatty, but optically excellent. Great lens.
     
  5. beejaybee

    beejaybee Marvin

    If you have a OM4Ti already the obvious upgrade is to an OM3 (or OM3Ti if you can find one - they seem to be only marginally commoner than hens' teeth) which has the same handling characteristics as an OM4Ti switched to manual, takes all the same accessories yet has a purely mechanical shutter.

    The FM3a is a very fine camera but doesn't have the same metering flexibility - it's centre weighted only. Furthermore the FM3a doesn't have such a wide range of some accessories which I think are critical e.g. interchangeable focusing screens. Also I find it annoying to have to move the film advance of the FM3a to the "standoff" position in order to make the meter work. The FM3a does have shutter speeds up to 1/8000 but this isn't much of an issue when using medium speed film. The FM3a also makes a "sneeze" sound when taking an exposure which I (very probably, wrongly) find less reassuring than the traditional Olympus "clunk".

    Having said all that, almost new FM3a's are still around in fair quantities, and some (but by no means all) of the Nikkor lenses are superior to the equivalent Zuikos.

    Unless you have very specific requirements, I can't see than switching from Olympus to Nikon manual focus systems is going to make any sense, now or at any time in the forseeable future.
     
  6. Benchmark

    Benchmark Well-Known Member

    Mmmm. I agree with you. But I should perhaps point out that I had no plans to 'invest' in a FM3a. I just think they look gorgeous and purposeful, especially the one in Huw's photograph. :)

    I am not entirely sure about the OM3Ti 'upgrade' though. I could never quite see the logic of a fully manual camera that cost twice as much as the 4Ti, especially when the 4Ti has a fully manual mode!
     
  7. Bettina

    Bettina Well-Known Member

    I actually stayed loyal to Pentax for a while and got their first DSLR - good camera, though. But it didn't produce the quality I needed. So I switched to the Canon 1Ds and haven't looked back since.
     
  8. beejaybee

    beejaybee Marvin

    Well it was never discounted .... when first released the OM3 was about the same price as the OM4.

    The logic (such as it is) is that, if you have an OM3(Ti) and the electronics die (temporarily if the batteries are exhausted, but all sold state electronics do stop working eventually) you have a camera which is fully functional except for the meter. With an OM4(Ti) you have manual shutter speeds of 1/60 and B only, and no flash sync at all, unless the electronics are OK and you have good batteries fitted.
     
  9. Iloca

    Iloca Well-Known Member

    I'd love an OM3 ordinary or ti, it would be the ultimate SLR IMO but to be honest if the batteries or metering electronics die on an OM3 it effectively becomes an OM1 (without a self timer) :(

    Richard
     
  10. Benchmark

    Benchmark Well-Known Member

    ........ But in the greater scheme of things, which is the more reliable, and which would be easier to get repaired if the need arose?

    I have a pair of ME Super bodies, the first of which was purchased around 1979, the second a year or two later. Both have been very well used, but they both work perfectly after more than twenty-five years. If the OM keeps going for that long I shall probably be past caring! :D
     
  11. Benchista

    Benchista Which Tyler

    I have to say that the OM3Ti was the camera that did more than most to put me off Olympus. It just struck me as being completely the wrong camera - or rather at completely the wrong price. OK, times were difficult; Oly doubled the price of the OM4Ti overnight. But over a grand for the OM3Ti? Barmy, quite barmy, when the closest competitor - the Nikon FM2 - was half that price or less. I wanted to buy a decent camera at the time, and the OM4Ti had been top of the list - suddenly, I was left contemplating the OM101 as the only affordable option, and that wasn't a serious consideration. Much though I love OMs, I couldn't conceive of paying that sort of price. And even more for a camera with less facilities? I thought Oly had lost their marbles. And still do on that issue. And effectively, the OM series was dead in the water from that point on. :(
     
  12. Benchmark

    Benchmark Well-Known Member

    .... Oh well.

    Anything Huw can do............

    [​IMG]


    Methinks I need to do a bit of work on the lighting though. :eek: :D
     
  13. Benchista

    Benchista Which Tyler

    Well, I eventually got an OM4 much later, and liked it very much - sold it earlier this year, but I know I would've been happy with the Ti.
     
  14. Benchmark

    Benchmark Well-Known Member

    As I said before, I am having trouble putting mine down right now. Since buying the new 35 mm lens a month ago I have put around fifteen rolls of fim through it.

    I really like using the E1 for my day job, but the OM is just so uncomplicated, and with a fast lens, that huge, bright viewfinder is a joy to use. :)
     
  15. Benchista

    Benchista Which Tyler

    Must say that whenever I use an OM (down to the 1n and 2n now), I seldom use any other lens. Lovely.
     
  16. Iloca

    Iloca Well-Known Member

    Re: Switching camera brands - would you??

    [​IMG]

    Well whats a camera for if not to take photos of other cameras ;)
     
  17. Benchmark

    Benchmark Well-Known Member

    Nice. Very nice. I have always liked that 24 mm lens too. I wouldn't mind trying the 20 mm if I could get my hands on one.

    I know this thread was about changing camera brands, but I'm sure that if you keep almost any good camera for long enough, you will eventually re-discover it.

    In my experience, that rediscovery is often just as fresh and exciting as buying a brand new camera (of any brand) with accessories. Keeping an old friend like the OM, or perhaps a MF film camera also means that you probably have a much greater opportunity to buy exotic lenses and accessories than you ever would if you kept buying the latest models (or swapping brands) all the time.

    For some reason, I personally find modern camera equipment quite boring. It may be technically competent, but it is boring, and I have little inclination to reach for my wallet. But if I see a mint condition lens for one of my film cameras, I find it difficult to resist. I don't know why. Maybe it is the rarity value. Maybe it is because I love using film. Or maybe it is because these lenses are made from glass and metal, and they just 'look' and 'feel' so nice.

    I have been fortunate enough to buy a brand new E1 and several of the Pro spec Zuiko lenses over the past three years or so. But I can honestly say, none has given me the same pleasure as buying a similar spec lens for one of my film cameras.

    I know I am not alone in this, but can anyone explain why?
     
  18. huwevans

    huwevans Not Really Here

    <splutter> WHAT? [​IMG] I've got copyright on that composition - you'll be hearing from my solicitors! ;-)
     
  19. huwevans

    huwevans Not Really Here

    One of the most popular threads we ever had was people posting pictures of their cameras. Maybe it's time for another one. :)
     
  20. Benchmark

    Benchmark Well-Known Member

    Copy-what? :D

    ROFL :D :D :D
     

Share This Page