Need Getting started hints; Olympus OM-1

[WithTheGrain]

I posted in the "New Digital SLR Recommendation" thread (http://badgerandblade.com/vb/showthread.php?t=53254) mentioning that I was considering an e510 from Olympus. A few people made the point about considering a Nikon because of the availability of old lenses. Well, I considered this, but then thought to ask my Dad about what sort of camera his old 35mm SLR was. Turns out, it was an Olympus and its lenses can work easily with the e510 (with a low cost adaptor). Well, that made my mind up on the 510, but I am not purchasing it just yet. Instead, I am jumping into the OM-1.

I was wondering if anyone can give some getting started tips. I am brand new to SLR, so I am still trying to figure out what all the apeture numbers and all the other things actually mean, so tips on resources on that would be great. But, I am very curious about what other things I should keep in mind regarding this camera- tips on film choices, processing, etc. Anything you have to share would be awesome. Also, please feel free to post any photos you have taken with an OM-1 if you want, those are always appreciated!

[Rei]

I used an OM-1 for the longest time, and all of my college photography work was done on an OM-F.

Here is a quick start guide.
http://mir.com.my/rb/photography/har...nual/index.htm

[cr8n]

I used an OM-1 in the 70s, and bought 2 bodies recently for a film photo course. In fact, if you need a lens ...

I'm back to digital. Overall, the expense is less, the mess is less, and the convenience is awesome.

Unless a course requires you to use an old film camera, I'd save the time and money and go straight to the digital it sounds like you want. Olympus dSLRs are seldom the very top rated machines, but they're fine, and as you mention, you have old gear you can reuse ... So ...

FWIW,
Paul

[WithTheGrain]

I used an OM-1 in the 70s, and bought 2 bodies recently for a film photo course. In fact, if you need a lens ...

I'm back to digital. Overall, the expense is less, the mess is less, and the convenience is awesome.

Unless a course requires you to use an old film camera, I'd save the time and money and go straight to the digital it sounds like you want. Olympus dSLRs are seldom the very top rated machines, but they're fine, and as you mention, you have old gear you can reuse ... So ...

FWIW,
Paul

I know what you mean re. film being easier. I got the body and 2 lenses from my Dad for free and am enjoying shooting it. I am looking forward to getting a DSLR soon though and want to get the best of both worlds. I have seen debates re. the Nikon vs. Olympus. So far, I have yet to see an actual review that holds out any issues with the e510. Instead, I have seen lots of brand loyalty claims that one is better than another, etc. I know the temptation to say, X brand is better because that is what I have. Then again, maybe I am missing the poor reviews.

EDIT: and don't get me wrong, I don't want to come off like I don't appriciate your contribution. I am just flummoxed that the camera continues to get review scores as good if not better than the alternatives suggested (Nikon D40 is a common alternative which scores less than the e510), but people still try to caution me about it. Most often, it is suggest to go with Nikon or Canon because they sell more. For me, sales volume isn't the only consideration. But, like I said, please let me know if you have some really negative reviews or issues that I ought to be aware of.

[brofkand]

The big problem I have with Olympus DSLRs is their four thirds system. They use a smaller sensor compared to the other big players. To you, that means "more noise at high ISOs." (the sensor is a quarter the size of a 35mm film plane. Typical DSLR sensors are 1.5x as small)

That could mean ISO 3200 is unusable on the Olympus, or it could mean ISO 800 is unusable. I haven't tested it, but I would suspect ISO 800 would show some serious grain and ISO 1600 would be unusable. ISO 800 on a D40 is actually decent. ISO 1600 is usable when you need it. ISO 3200 is unusable unless you are in a serious pinch (only have a slow lens, no tripod, nothing to prop the camera up against to have a longer shutter release).

That's what I would worry about more than brand, price, or other features: ISO performance and the small sensor.

[WithTheGrain]

The big problem I have with Olympus DSLRs is their four thirds system. They use a smaller sensor compared to the other big players. To you, that means "more noise at high ISOs." (the sensor is a quarter the size of a 35mm film plane. Typical DSLR sensors are 1.5x as small)

That could mean ISO 3200 is unusable on the Olympus, or it could mean ISO 800 is unusable. I haven't tested it, but I would suspect ISO 800 would show some serious grain and ISO 1600 would be unusable. ISO 800 on a D40 is actually decent. ISO 1600 is usable when you need it. ISO 3200 is unusable unless you are in a serious pinch (only have a slow lens, no tripod, nothing to prop the camera up against to have a longer shutter release).

That's what I would worry about more than brand, price, or other features: ISO performance and the small sensor.

Ahh, the noise issue. I have to admit, being a novice, this is something that I am not sure I know enough about. I have been poking around a bit reading about the issue, and have gotten a preview of the issue. I think ultimately, what leads me to the e510 is simply that it is such a great bargain right now with the introduction of the 520. It has a variety of features that aren't found on other cameras unless you shell out closer to 900 for other brands. As a person who is purchasing mainly for family shots, and secondarily for hobby/art shots, I am willing to take the gamble that it will do what I need it to do. That said, thank you for the headsup on the ISO issue.

What do you chose to use? Canon/Nikon? Film/Digital? I am embarrassed to say that this is my first trip into the world of SLR cameras (digital or film). I am of a generation that had used both disposables and point and shoot digital cameras. It is a whole new world just to figure out what all this stuff even means! I am having fun learning so far though, thanks for the help.

[Rei]

What do you chose to use? Canon/Nikon? Film/Digital? I am embarrassed to say that this is my first trip into the world of SLR cameras (digital or film). I am of a generation that had used both disposables and point and shoot digital cameras. It is a whole new world just to figure out what all this stuff even means! I am having fun learning so far though, thanks for the help.

I use Canon and Nikon, both film and digital. I have also used Olympus and Pentax cameras.

Choosing canon or nikon over olympus comes down to the fact that you are choosing flashes and lenses. The quality of the image has more to do with the quality of the light than anything else. As such, the Nikon D40 and N90s are great cameras because they give you access to the Nikon flashes, which are easily superior to all other flashes on the market.

The next thing that has more effect on the quality of the image than the body is the lens. Again, Nikon and Canon are leaders of the pack in this area. However, an OM mount adapter may just be the ticket to level the playing field.

If I were buying a SLR in the E510's price range today, I would purchase the Canon 30D from Ritz Camera. Mainly because Ritz Camera is going out of business and they are getting rid of everything out of their warehouse. Of course, those deals don't last. So, my decision would change tomorrow based on what I can find that gives me the most bang for my buck.

In any case, the most important thing to remember is that ANY DSLR that you can buy today is better than what Ansel Adams was using. Spend more time shooting than discussing, and enjoy yourself. Pick up a camera and be the guy that shoots photos. Don't be the guy that talks about shooting photos.

[brofkand]

I use Nikon Digital, Nikon film, Polaroid, and several cameras that use 120 film. All give excellent results when used properly.

My photography odyssey began like you; I got a D40 for Christmas last year and have used it like crazy. It inspired me to move to different areas of photography. My first branch was Polaroid, then 120 film, and I've come full-circle with a Nikon FM film SLR.

To answer your question about noise: the smaller the sensor, the more noise will be introduced when using higher ISOs. That's why cameraphones always look terrible, since the sensor is tiny. That's why point-and-shoot digitals look bad at anything above ISO 400 or sometimes 800. That's why most DSLRs have little grain at 400, more at 800, lots at 1600, and are almost unusable at 3200. "Full Frame" professional DSLRs like Nikon's D3 or Canon's 5D are excepted, since their sensor is the same size as a 35mm frame. That's why I am wary to recommend Olympus; their sensors are a quarter the size of a 35mm frame, while most other DSLRs are roughly half the size.

[brofkand]

And, I'm a film and digital guy so I use noise and grain interchangeably. But in truth, noise should refer to digital "aberrations" and grain should refer to film "aberrations."

[King of Kailua]

I used an OM-10 with a manual adapter for many years. It had been given to me by my father and was my favorite film camera until it was stolen some years ago unfortunately. The 70's era Olympus OM's are compact and unobtrusive enough to take along for spontaneous shots that did not intimidate my subjects. They also had great Ziess lenses that had wonderfully smooth oil lubricated action. I imagine the OM-1 is similar. If you cannot go fully manual with the OM-1 alone, I recommend getting a manual adapter, a remote plunger trigger, a simple tripod or monopod, and a couple of different lenses. If you have a standard 35mm lens, you may want to get something like a 50-200 with a macro setting.

As for your aperture settings; the larger the number = the smaller the aperture hole from which your camera will draw light. So, the sunnier it is the smaller the aperture you will need for a decent standard exposure. "Sunny 16" is a general guideline setting. Also, the aperture setting has an effect on the depth of field you can get in focus. The smaller the aperture = the more depth of field, but you may need to slow down the shutter speed to achieve a desired exposure. You can fiddle with the manual shutter speed settings as well if you want to close down the aperture.

I don't know if they teach darkroom techniques anymore with the advent of digital alternatives nowadays, but it would be really great to take an introductory class (maybe from a community college?) that focuses on darkroom techniques, printing and black and white photography. This would give you a great foundation in photography that would be valuable wherever your hobby takes you in the field of photography.

[brofkand]

As King said, always remember the sunny 16 rule when shooting outside with no light meter:
When it's sunny outside,
Set the lens aperture to f/16
Set the shutter speed to the reciprocal of your film speed (if using 100 speed film, use a 1/100 shutter speed. If 400 speed, 1/400, etc).

I also second taking a darkroom class. Or see if there is a photography studio in your area that still has a traditional wet darkroom. Or peruse your local Craigslist, Freecycle, etc, to snap up old darkroom equipment that still works. That's what I did; got everything i need to run a wet darkroom for less than $100.

I know that my university still teaches film (in fact, film exclusively since so many film techniques have digital analogues; dodging and burning, etc) and I would suspect many still do as well. I doubt a community college would, it seems to me that CC's tend to focus on "hirable" careers rather than superfluous things like wet darkroom skills.

Youtube is your friend. B&B Is your friend. Photo.net is your friend. All of these places have people that will help you learn this stuff.

[WithTheGrain]

In any case, the most important thing to remember is that ANY DSLR that you can buy today is better than what Ansel Adams was using. Spend more time shooting than discussing, and enjoy yourself. Pick up a camera and be the guy that shoots photos. Don't be the guy that talks about shooting photos.

This sums it up in so many ways (and for so many things beyond just cameras). I am still leaning toward the Olympus at 580 for body and two lenses, simply because it is so cheap and gives me an excuse to collect old OM lenses for the OM-1.

I had previously looked at the Nikon, but felt that I would have had to spend around 900 for the more expensive model (d80 I think) to get all the features I eventually want. This is way out of my price range right now, so I can always go that way later to have access to all the plusses that people have mentioned. I of course don't want to be the guy who asks for advice and then ignores it all and does whatever the hell he wants. I seriously looked into everyones points, but still think the Olympus is the right choice for me at this time to get started with.

Now, I just need to get started! I have been shooting the OM-1 over the last few days, which has been fun. It is such a shift from digital, not knowing if the shots are coming out or not. I suppose that is the fun of developing them...

I still haven't quite figured out the effect of apeture and ISO yet; I have read enough to have a basic idea of what they do. I think what will help is taking some pictures at different settings and then just looking at them so that I can connect all the technological terms with the actual look of the photos. In the mean time, I think I am going to hunt down a photography book to get a onestop resource for info to "de-newb" myself...

[Rei]

Just out of curiosity, does your OM-1 still have the hot shoe mount that screws into the pentaprism?

[WithTheGrain]

Just out of curiosity, does your OM-1 still have the hot shoe mount that screws into the pentaprism?

Yeah, it does. It is pretty much mint- my dad is a bit anal and kept good care of it. It even has the original manual and receipt for the camera and every lens.

[Rei]

Yeah, it does. It is pretty much mint- my dad is a bit anal and kept good care of it. It even has the original manual and receipt for the camera and every lens.

Nice.

For the longest time I was using a Pentax with the screw mount 105mm-f/2.8 along with a hot shoe to pc sync adapter and a pair of nikon sb-26s as my back up system.

I would have no problem using an OM-1 with either the 135mm-f2.8, the 100mm-f2 or the 85mm-f2 as my back up in place of the Pentax.

I used to have (and love) the 50mm-f1.2, but it died with my OM-F in a tragic event.

I'm currently in love with the Nikon FM3A, but can't justify the cost, as I still have my Pentax. There is something to be said about the OM-1, my old Pentax, and the Nikon FM3A and any other camera that can be operated without batteries. The failure rate of those systems is so low that it is ridiculous. Of course, I'm one that likes a traditional shave and more elegant solutions to problems than the skymall has to offer...

[brofkand]

In any case, the most important thing to remember is that ANY DSLR that you can buy today is better than what Ansel Adams was using.

I could debate that statement until the middle of next week. But I won't :-D

AgainstTheGrain: If the Olympus works for you, then take all the points I and others have made and throw them away to the back of your mind. There is really only one thing Photographers agree with: Results. Shoot with the camera that makes sense to you. I've seen amazing pictures come out of an iPhone, and I've seen horrible pictures come out of a Canon 5D.

[Rei]

I could debate that statement until the middle of next week. But I won't :-D

If you know enough to debate that statement, then you aren't the kind of person I would be directing that statement to...

I concede the fact that 8x10 negative plates have a much higher dynamic range and less noise (grain) than anything on the market today, but the technology of the lenses, lighting, shutter and body controls, and post-production (developing) is so much further ahead of anything that Ansel Adams had, that it is fair to say that a modern dslr gives most people more opportunities to create better images than Ansel Adams.

Yet, saying the above paragraph is so convoluted and unintelligible...

[King of Kailua]

But there is something pure and analogous to his subject matter that Ansel gets when he captures the natural wilderness in his photographs. It seems so simple; an image on a plate through a baffle. But he goes to these places with his large format camera and heavy wooden tripod and captures incredible detail and depth of field. Great works of art as well as historical documents.

[brofkand]

That's what I was getting at, King. Ansel had an eye for an amazing photograph. I remember hearing on a podcast that one of his more famous photographs was made on a day when he only had one negative to use. He had to make 100% sure he got it right the first time.

[Rei]

That's what I was getting at, King. Ansel had an eye for an amazing photograph. I remember hearing on a podcast that one of his more famous photographs was made on a day when he only had one negative to use. He had to make 100% sure he got it right the first time.

Somehow I imagine that equipment was not Ansel's limiting factor...