Keith (M) Posted March 8, 2014 Share #1 Posted March 8, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) A new neighbour, seeing me with "an old film camera" (actually a young M7!) slung over my shoulder, asked me if I might be interested in "some old film stuff" that he had meant to dispose of. He disappeared back into his house, emerging moments late with a very ratty-looking camera bag and then proceeded to reveal a pristine looking OM2-N, 50mm f1.8, a Kiron 80-20mm f4.5, a huge Vivitar 4600 flashgun and various bits'n'pieces. "Don't want anything for it - I almost slung it in the bin last night" quoth he! Well, what can one say... Have never handled an Olympus before as I was always a Pentax-man and indeed still have the ME-Super that I bought 2nd-hand at the end of the 1970's. I always thought that the OM's were the most petite of the SLRs but seeing them alongside each other now, I was surprised to see that the ME-Super is actually smaller (and better looking too). Still, mustn't look a gift-horse in the mouth! Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/223245-olympus-om-2n-anyone/?do=findComment&comment=2545811'>More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 8, 2014 Posted March 8, 2014 Hi Keith (M), Take a look here Olympus OM-2N Anyone?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Peter H Posted March 8, 2014 Share #2 Posted March 8, 2014 I always found the OM viewfinder exceptionally bright and clear and amazingly large for such a small camera. The whole OM line-up from OM1 to the 3 & 4, including some really fantastic Zuiko lenses,was in my opinion just about the most attractive SLR camera available for quite some time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stealth3kpl Posted March 8, 2014 Share #3 Posted March 8, 2014 I had the same experience a few weeks ago. Someone throwing out an OM-1n, olympus flash, and zuikos 50/1.8 and 100/2.8. Also in the plastic bag, a boxed Olympus XA and flash (unfortunately, the rangefinder mechanism of the XA was broken, but Oxfam were happy to take it to sell as "spares or repairs"), and a very nice Kodak Retina 1 (type 141) which needs a CLA (any suggestions?). Oxfam gained £100 from me today when I bought a mint Ricoh GR1. Pete Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
01af Posted March 8, 2014 Share #4 Posted March 8, 2014 The miniaturisation of the Pentax M series (MX, ME, ME Super, and MV) was Pentax' reaction to the petite Olympus OM series. Before that, Pentax SLR cameras rather looked like full-size bricks (Spotmatic and K series). The Pentax MX was a wonderful small but pro-grade SLR camera, very similar to the Olympus OM-1 ... but the ME, ME Super, and MV were just rubbish, basically meant for the camera-illiterate beginner. The OM-2 (and then OM-2N) was the world's first SLR camera that was able to control flash exposure via TTL metering. Allegedly, this was a Minolta patent which Minolta had to sell to Olympus in order to cover the exploding development costs of the upcoming Minolta XM camera. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted March 8, 2014 Share #5 Posted March 8, 2014 My first serious SLR (excluding a Zenith was an OM1 bought in Melksham. I still regard it as an exceptionally well designed and extremely petite SLR and am waiting for a full frame dSLR of the same size and as simplistic controls (dRangefinder is catered for already fortunately;)). I'm constantly tempted to pick up an OM camera but don't tend to own things I don't use and I already have a film camera. (I do though own an OM 28mm lens which is built into a focus stacking mount and capable of producing excellent technical quality images on a 5D2 with 1:1 to infinity subjects in focus!). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gyoung Posted March 8, 2014 Share #6 Posted March 8, 2014 The miniaturisation of the Pentax M series (MX, ME, ME Super, and MV) was Pentax' reaction to the petite Olympus OM series. Before that, Pentax SLR cameras rather looked like full-size bricks (Spotmatic and K series). The Pentax MX was a wonderful small but pro-grade SLR camera, very similar to the Olympus OM-1 ... but the ME, ME Super, and MV were just rubbish, basically meant for the camera-illiterate beginner.Snip What a load of old cobblers as they say, the ME super was just an electronic shutter version, is the M7 also for the camera illiterate beginner? My son's ME super still works, and IMHO and experience the pentaxs are better made than the OM1 I had, with more consistent lenses, some of my Olympus lenses were quite poor. Gerry Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith (M) Posted March 8, 2014 Author Share #7 Posted March 8, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) but the ME, ME Super, and MV were just rubbish, basically meant for the camera-illiterate beginner. Either that is that a troll attempt or you are just showing your ignorance of those cameras. My ME Super is well over 35 years old and still functioning perfectly (which is more than I can say for my three-year old M7 and its three trips to Solms). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
honcho Posted March 9, 2014 Share #8 Posted March 9, 2014 This thread brings back a few memories of the various cameras I used during the 70's: Olympus OM1, Pentax MX, ME Super and my favourite of all, the Nikon FE. A Beattie screen was (is) a worthwhile upgrade for any of those which can take it. It was a period of innovation in 35mm slr design by most manufacturers with Pentax and Olympus setting the trend for smaller bodies. I get equal pleasure using my Nikon FE as I do with my Leica MP. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
01af Posted March 9, 2014 Share #9 Posted March 9, 2014 My ME Super is well over 35 years old and still functioning perfectly ... It may be good and long-lasting quality, technically—however, features and controls are those of a beginner's camera. But then, I admit that the ME Super was slightly better than the ME and the MV. Still the only really desirable camera from the M series is the MX. However, if I wanted a Pentax SLR film camera with K bayonet mount then I'd go for a K2 DMD ... I'd prefer that one even over an LX. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted March 9, 2014 Share #10 Posted March 9, 2014 I’m a bit puzzled what you mean by a “beginners camera” How do we differentiate from an “expert’s camera”? The ME Super actually had quite a high specification for its time, with 1 /2000th sec, 1 /125 sync speed, decent centre-weighed metering, etc. Being well-built too it left little to be desired. It even took a winder. If you talk about beginner’s cameras I would tend to think of a Revue 1000 or some other Praktika clone, or maybe a twin eye Lubitel. Or the optical viewfinder stuff like an Agfa Click. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted March 9, 2014 Share #11 Posted March 9, 2014 To get the most out of a Lubitel (a fine camera with a very good taking lens) I'd have thought you'd need some expertise. I learned photography using a 4x5 Sinar, but view camera's are pretty simple compared with any SLR. But a Leica M of any type should count as a good beginners camera, not only because beginners do buy them even now, but they are simple. During the era of the OM2 I was using Nikon's and a colleagues OM system always fascinated me. They just did everything perfectly and without fuss. I now have an OM4-Ti and the viewfinder size and clarity is breathtaking, not to mention the sophisticated metering that is so easy to use. But I'm glad I didn't jump ship from Nikon at the time, standing outside in all weathers looking for the news was a Nikon's job, principally because the OM is impossible to use with gloves on Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
M9reno Posted March 9, 2014 Share #12 Posted March 9, 2014 Before Leica, an OM-2N was my usual camera for travel and work. It never gave me trouble, except through my own ignorance, when I failed to realise that the shutter will not fire, either on Manual or Auto mode, when the batteries are exhausted. Rather like an absolute version of the M7, which still leaves you some battery-free speeds. For a month or so, I put the OM down and gave it up for dead! On another occasion, I discovered that dozens of shots taken in Greece came out over-exposed! The culprit was the lens, whose auto diaphragm mechanism was sticky and not closing properly on exposure. It gave me reason to distrust SLRs: more parts to go wrong. Still, the OM-2N is a camera for which I still feel much affection. I had it CLAd last year, and it gets occasional use from me and my daughter. It is a good teaching camera, I find. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrism Posted March 9, 2014 Share #13 Posted March 9, 2014 How I lusted after my brother's OM-1 in the early seventies, but I couldn't afford to buy one of my own. So I, after a couple of Prakticas, decided it would be Pentax for me. A K1000 in 1977, and an ME Super in 1981. That kept me going until I got jealous of my wife's SF-1 so I bought an SF10 in 1991. The K1000 still works, but the ME Super gave up the ghost a couple of years ago. The autofocus Pentaces still work fine (in fact I just bought a 50mm/f1.4 for them). I was sad about the ME Super, so I visited KEH and came away with a replacement, and an MX, and an OM-1, and an OM-2. That place is dangerous. Eventually I gave the two OMs to my brother, in the hope that he might get active again, but I don't think it has worked. The ME Super is a fine little camera, and smaller and lighter than the OM-1 as long as you use the 40mm.f2.8 pancake lens sold with it. Add a 50mm f2 or f1.8 and it's bigger and heavier. Here it is next to an MP for a size comparison: Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! It's a fine little camera, with the advantage that it's small enough to go in a coat pocket, and you can't get the photo if you don't have a camera with you! Chris Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! It's a fine little camera, with the advantage that it's small enough to go in a coat pocket, and you can't get the photo if you don't have a camera with you! Chris ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/223245-olympus-om-2n-anyone/?do=findComment&comment=2546268'>More sharing options...
01af Posted March 9, 2014 Share #14 Posted March 9, 2014 I’m a bit puzzled what you mean by a “beginner's camera” ... A beginner's camera is one that is specifically designed to be used primarily or exclusively in auto mode. The ME had no manual mode at all, and the ME Super had one but it was uncomfortable to use and more like an afterthought (two silly up and down buttons rather than a decent shutter-speed dial). Furthermore, both ME and ME Super could only be fitted with a 2 fps winder—the 5 fps motor-drive was available for the MX exclusively. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith (M) Posted March 9, 2014 Author Share #15 Posted March 9, 2014 —however, features and controls are those of a beginner's camera. ME Super had one but it was uncomfortable to use and more like an afterthought (two silly up and down buttons rather than a decent shutter-speed dial). Like Jaap, I am somewhat puzzled at your first statement and even more by the second. It functions in either Auto (aperture priority) mode or in Manual mode - as does the OM2. The only control difference is in Manual mode, where the ME-Super has the two handily-placed small buttons to go up/down the speed scale whereas the OM2 has a big clunky dial sitting between the lens and pentaprism housing. Ergonomically I prefer the ME. Unlike the OM2, the Pentax will not leave the photographer completely snookered in case of flat batteries. Anyway despite some appealing features, I know what type of 35mm film camera I prefer to use - and it is not something that goes 'clack-clunk', so no prizes for guessing which of the three below it is! Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/223245-olympus-om-2n-anyone/?do=findComment&comment=2546331'>More sharing options...
Peter H Posted March 9, 2014 Share #16 Posted March 9, 2014 .........The only control difference is in Manual mode, where the ME-Super has the two handily-placed small buttons to go up/down the speed scale whereas the OM2 has a big clunky dial sitting between the lens and pentaprism housing. ...................) I found the shutter speed ring the best and most ergonomic arrangement of any manual camera I can think of. Mind you, it was my first ever SLR so it seemed a perfectly natural arrangement to use the same hand-movement to adjust focussing, aperture and shutter speed. Perhaps if yopu were used to top-plate dials it would have been harder to adjust to a new way of doing things. The OM 1 was a truly innovative camera in a number of ways, but it obviously didn't suit everyone, which is often the case when you try new ideas. As you can tell, I'm a fan!. (A non-practising fan, however!) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DES Posted March 9, 2014 Share #17 Posted March 9, 2014 I have had an OM2 since 1976 and it was and still is a beautiful piece of kit. It was the nearest thing that I could afford to a Leica at the time, the size, the bright viewfinder, the smooth wind on, and the quiet shutter, in a class of their own for an SLR. I still can't part with it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
spydrxx Posted March 10, 2014 Share #18 Posted March 10, 2014 I picked one up 3 years ago (actually I ended up with 2 of them in a lens deal), and while they don't get a lot of use, I did put together a lens package for it covering my usual shooting range. The Zuiko 50 macro is as good as the Canon FD 50 macro, and gets more use than most of my other lenses on this body. Comments on the bright VF are right on the button...a major attraction to me. Overall a really nice, almost compact SLR with good glass available for it. Definitely a keeper (sold the black 2nd one though). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stealth3kpl Posted March 10, 2014 Share #19 Posted March 10, 2014 The OM-1n is my ski-touring camera. I'm not bothered about it getting damaged and going through freeze-thaw cycles. It's only seized up once as I crossed a frozen Norwegian lake, and came back to life sitting in my bag at the door of the hut. The lubricant is pretty old now. Pete Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
robert_parker Posted March 10, 2014 Share #20 Posted March 10, 2014 The first camera that I bought for myself was a Nikon FE2 but I was always a fan of the Olympus OM 1 and the Canon AE1, both of which I loved from afar but pre-dated my camera buying budget. I'm pleased to say that I've still got my FE2 and recently found an excellent example of both an AE1 and an OM 1 on eBay for less that £30 each, with lens Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.