|
Post by hannes on Dec 2, 2015 13:37:54 GMT -5
Hello: Most of my SLRs I regulary use are Nikons from the 70ies and the 80ies. Last weekend I shot my first roll of film in an Olympus OM-2n. I really like the handling of the camera, its size and the bright image in the finder. Now I asked myself the qustion which Nikon can be compared to the OM-2n with focus on handling and using. Not technical data. I found my answer allready, but I'm interested in your opinions. Hannes
|
|
|
Post by belgiumreporter on Dec 2, 2015 17:58:24 GMT -5
Depending on exactly what you like about the OM 2 there are a few candidates. 1 The most likely candidate : The FE, main diffrence is the OTF metering of the OM and the fe being some 70 grams heavier. 2 The EM lighter and even smaller than the OM , No manual mode though. 3 If you really like the shutter speed ring concentric with the lens mount like the OM then there's only the nikkormat F series but they are large heavy and all manual mechanical cameras. 4 if you would move away from the OM2's time frame then the FA would be a good choice radically diffrent in features, but not in handeling. One BIG problem with the OM2: it is completely battery dependable, all nikon's have at least one mechanical shutterspeed in case of battery failure.
|
|
hansz
Lifetime Member
Hans
Posts: 697
|
Post by hansz on Dec 3, 2015 8:17:13 GMT -5
From the looks only... a FM2??
|
|
|
Post by belgiumreporter on Dec 3, 2015 10:14:40 GMT -5
Here's a quick pic of what i've suggested, plus one, there isn't any nikon that comes as close to the OM as the pentax M series .
|
|
Stephen
Lifetime Member
Still collecting.......
Posts: 2,718
|
Post by Stephen on Dec 3, 2015 12:54:56 GMT -5
I do not think that Olympus were aiming at rivalling Nikon, who occupied the pro and top amateur marketplace. Maitani was aiming at Pentax and Yashica etc., in the mid priced ranges, and his own target was to design a reflex as small as he could get to a Leica.
It was pressure from the US that persuaded them to market it as a Pro camera, mainly on the performance promised from the large aperture lenses in the range. Many retailers in Europe and the UK priced it higher than expected, and it still sold like hot cakes.
Olympus were forced to introduce the motor drive, not originally designed, to bring to a pro range. The OM2 was different, it was again sold at a premium price, but the sales reflected this and were slow. It was unique in the flash and exposure system, but it never converted people away from Nikon, and I don't think it was ever intended to.
Stephen.
|
|
|
Post by hannes on Dec 3, 2015 14:59:37 GMT -5
Hello: Interesting thougths came up. I also thought of the Nikkormats, but too heavy. Even if the EL has electronic controlled shutter and automatic. I do not have en EL, but this model lacks manual mode. The EL can be compared to the OM 10. The FM is pure mechanic and bigger than then OM2. It is noisier and not so smooth in operation. Do not know the FE or FE2, but size is similar to FM. The FA is a good camera with all I wanted to have on a non AF SLR, but when I'm using them I like the FG most. It is small, and fun to use. So for me the FG is the Nikon that comes closest to the OM-2(n). What I like on the OM2n: The size and elegance of the body. The bright finder and the ease of using it. Next time I'll go out for long time exposure in the evening or night. As techi I like the way the metering is done. Here are 2 shots of OM2 and G side by side. In the top view the OM2 is so elegant. Where did the engineers put the electronic in the OM2? Hannes
|
|
|
Post by philbirch on Dec 9, 2015 12:10:55 GMT -5
FM2
|
|
|
Post by hannes on Dec 12, 2015 13:12:22 GMT -5
Hello: Meanwhile I learned a lot about the OM-2[n] I have a working OM-2n and a broken OM-2, the OM-2 came with the Quick Auto 310 flash. But this one does not unleash its full features on the OM-2n. So I looked for a T 32 which is perfect for the OM-2n. It came with a working OM 10 as addon. I was surprised about the difference in look and feel between OM 2n and OM 10. The OM 10 is so much lighter and has a cheap plastic feeling. Below a picture of the OM 2n with "wrong" flash and Vivitar 70-210 Series 1 lens. I made some macro shoots with this lens last weekend.
|
|
|
Post by lesdmess on Dec 12, 2015 16:25:15 GMT -5
Hello: Most of my SLRs I regulary use are Nikons from the 70ies and the 80ies. Last weekend I shot my first roll of film in an Olympus OM-2n. I really like the handling of the camera, its size and the bright image in the finder. Now I asked myself the qustion which Nikon can be compared to the OM-2n with focus on handling and using. Not technical data. I found my answer allready, but I'm interested in your opinions. Hannes Is your answer the Nikon FG then? I don't believe there is a Nikon comparable to the OM-2 since all Nikon's have tiny viewfinder magnifications which are ideal for those who wear glasses. The FG may have similar features to the OM-2 with it's aperture priority, 1/1000th shutter speed and TTL flash, but it is the cheapest entry into a Nikon mount and therefore nowhere near the build quality of the Olympus top of the line single digit OM's. As with all Nikon viewfinders, it too is less then that of the OM-2's.
|
|
|
Post by hannes on Dec 12, 2015 17:08:30 GMT -5
Yes, the FG. Consumer camera but from feeling it comes closest. If I put it between OM 2n and OM 10 it is much closer to the OM 2n.
|
|
|
Post by conan on Dec 13, 2015 2:29:27 GMT -5
Hello: Meanwhile I learned a lot about the OM-2[n] I was surprised about the difference in look and feel between OM 2n and OM 10. The OM 10 is so much lighter and has a cheap plastic feeling. Tahts becasue the OM10 was made by Cosina using the CT-1G chassis
|
|
|
Post by hannes on Dec 13, 2015 6:31:06 GMT -5
I was surprised about the difference in look and feel between OM 2n and OM 10. The OM 10 is so much lighter and has a cheap plastic feeling. Tahts becasue the OM10 was made by Cosina using the CT-1G chassis Are you sure? Wasn't that the OM 2000 which is based on Cosina CT-1, as the Nikon FE 10, FG 20 and many more? OM-10 cloth horzontal shuter, CT-1 metal blades vertical running
|
|
|
Post by lesdmess on Dec 13, 2015 13:07:06 GMT -5
Yes, the FG. Consumer camera but from feeling it comes closest. If I put it between OM 2n and OM 10 it is much closer to the OM 2n. Of course close and feel are relative terms. Although an FG is nice - feature filled due to the few years development time it had over the OM2, it is not like an OM2 or any single digit Olympus OM for that matter.
|
|
Stephen
Lifetime Member
Still collecting.......
Posts: 2,718
|
Post by Stephen on Dec 13, 2015 19:16:44 GMT -5
The OM10 was entirely made by Olympus, the Cosina shutter was not used. The shutter unit is basically the same as the OM2 type, with the electronic release. Some parts as always would be bought in, but only screws and sub contraction of parts finishing. The shutter was made in house. The Olympus OM200O was made in 1997, into the start of the period of demise of the film reflex, and companies did not want to invest in new designs, and turned to outside suppliers like Cosina.
Stephen.
|
|
|
Post by belgiumreporter on Dec 14, 2015 3:08:23 GMT -5
I don't want to stray away to far from the original topic of this thread but got intrigued by the claim of Hannes in stating the FG20 would be cosina based. I allways thought it was based solely on a further develepment of the EM. Looking at the cosina files on this very forum it is not mentionned while the FE10 and FM10 are as well as the oly OM10. The Fm and Fe definatly got the cosina feel and look to them while the OLY 10 dosn't. Can any one shed some light on this (maybe in a new thread). I have a lot of these diffrent brands cosina clones( canon, nikon,exacta,petri...) and they all look, feel and sound the same, the buttons and switches are all in the same place and none of them has a winder or motor drive coupling. The OM 10 and FG (20) are so diffrent from the cosina's that it is hard for me to believe they are based on them.
|
|