http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=300088594310&ssPageName=STRK:MEWN:IT&ih=020
Just bought that off Ebay. Looks a great deal! Ive never owned or used a film SLR before and Ive only used a dSLR briefly once.
Any points for SLR or more specifically film SLR cameras? Anything I should know or some good read? :)
Heh, Ive got a classic OM1. Brilliant cameras. Problem lays in the batteries they use. AFAIK, theyre not available here any more. Might be different with the OM10. If you cant get the battery, then run it in manual mode with a light meter. 8) Totally old skool. Ive got a sweet Sekonic classic. (http://cepa.newschool.edu/~schlemoj/film_courses/sekonic_controls.html)
It says it takes either:
"two 1.5V alkaline-manganese batteries
LR44 (A76)."
"Two 1.5V silver oxide batteries SR44 (Eveready
EPX-76) or equivalents can be also used."
on the online PDF Manual for it.
Are those not just the kind of batteries you find in watches? If so, there are plenty of market stalls in town that sell these.
And if not, couldnt I find some online or something? :)
Youre good then. Ive got the older one that takes a 625 mercury button battery. I can use the silver ones but exposure is a little off, and the alkalines are worthless.
Ahhh good :)
Wheres best for developing? Is it much extra to get them stuck on a cd aswell? Im getting into band photography so having them in digital format aswell as prints would be best.
TBH, good scans are quite expensive and done on drums. I used to work at the print lab in Chicago where we did traditional silver processing and even some hand made papers and toning, then drum scanned into a computer. It was a PITA, but with good results.
You can get serviceable scans for cheap, but theyre none too good for actual production. If an image is to be be mass printed, it needs to be drum scanned.
Id just get an DSLR. :lol:
iv got a real old 35mm SLR here somewhere, made in the USSR (yes thats what it says on the bottom) I used to have some fun with it but could never get a really sharp shot, probably dirty or needing a service or sommit.
Quote from: jamieLAhhh good :)
Wheres best for developing? Is it much extra to get them stuck on a cd aswell? Im getting into band photography so having them in digital format aswell as prints would be best.
Providing you arent going to be publishing and just want snaps then check out the main supermarket chains such as Asda and Tesco. Put in a single film to each and see how they do, then use what you think is the best. It doesnt cost that much to have them put on CD but Id get yourself a flatbed scanner and use that, it should produce adequate results.
Quote from: Binary Shadowiv got a real old 35mm SLR here somewhere, made in the USSR (yes thats what it says on the bottom) I used to have some fun with it but could never get a really sharp shot, probably dirty or needing a service or sommit.
Chances are its a Zenith. Not the best cameras by a long way.
No publishing, just some stuff for a few local bands to use on their website/myspace page and to build up my "portfolio".
I like the idea behind using film :) That you cant just take 20 shots and pick the nicest one on the computer when you get home. You actually have to take the time and use a good eye to get the perfect shot first time.
Should be a good introduction into SLRs too! Ill be getting a Canon EOS 350D around May/June time when I can actually afford one :)
Nah, if you want good shots, its just like digital, shoot till your finger falls off. Its just more expensive. I processed a lot of rolls for "pro" fotogs at the Chicago lab, and lemme tell ya--the signal to noise ratio is pretty low, even at the top. :lol:
Quote from: SeriousQuote from: Binary Shadowiv got a real old 35mm SLR here somewhere, made in the USSR (yes thats what it says on the bottom) I used to have some fun with it but could never get a really sharp shot, probably dirty or needing a service or sommit.
Chances are its a Zenith. Not the best cameras by a long way.
Thats the boy.. POS then lol
Quote from: Binary ShadowQuote from: SeriousQuote from: Binary Shadowiv got a real old 35mm SLR here somewhere, made in the USSR (yes thats what it says on the bottom) I used to have some fun with it but could never get a really sharp shot, probably dirty or needing a service or sommit.
Chances are its a Zenith. Not the best cameras by a long way.
Thats the boy.. POS then lol
Rubbish, the Zenits are a light tight box like any other camera of that era. Some of the Russian lenses are ok, some of them are awful, some are direct copys of Leica and Zeiss designs and are actually quite good. Stick a Japanese Pentax 50mm Takumar lens on that lovely old M42 mount and the only limit is the photographer. Some people (myself included) are using adaptors to put M42 lenses on modern DSLRs simply because the quality of (some of) these old lenses is spectacular.
Film cameras are exactly as good as the lens you put on the front and the film you put in the back, no more, no less. Thereafter its up to you.
As to the OM-10, I think you paid on the high side of a fair price but it should serve you well as an introduction to SLR and a backup body once you get your DSLR. Since you are going Canon you cant use old lenses anyway so it doesnt matter that the OM series is long dead, and will actually make any other accessorys you may want in the meantime cheaper.
Id look at somewhere like Directfoto for developing while you learn, every film you send them they send you a free (but cheap) unexposed one back. Keeps film costs down while you get your head round things and the printing quality isnt bad either.
as above realy I love the M42 lens can get get them for pennys and built like tanks the kit lens on the alpha feels like a toy compared to any of my M42 lens even though the kit lens is worth more than all the M42 ones togeather
OM mount isnt a dead end if you go cannon OM to EOS adapters ;) (http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Olympus-OM-lens-adapter-to-Canon-EOS-5D-350D-y83_W0QQitemZ160092333151QQihZ006QQcategoryZ30059QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem)
Quote from: Alien8as above realy I love the M42 lens can get get them for pennys and built like tanks the kit lens on the alpha feels like a toy compared to any of my M42 lens even though the kit lens is worth more than all the M42 ones togeather
OM mount isnt a dead end if you go cannon OM to EOS adapters ;)
bet the M42s are sharper than the kit lens though, unless Sony/KM have put a lot more effort into their kit lens than anyone else.
No lens in my kit bag can touch my Zeiss MC Flektogon 35mm, which I picked up for next to nothing in a high street charity shop.
Maxi, I forgot to mention earlier, have you looked into getting a Wein cell for that OM-1 of yours? My Dad has the same problem as you with his old Pentax Spotmatic but it runs great (meter correct and everything) on Wein cells.
Word of a digital back for 35mm SLRs was also bandied about a few years ago. May have infact moved on further to be an actual viable product now. Have a google.
Still probably extortionately expensive. Digital backs for medium format cameras are insanely so.
Quote from: M3ta7h3adWord of a digital back for 35mm SLRs was also bandied about a few years ago. May have infact moved on further to be an actual viable product now. Have a google.
Still probably extortionately expensive. Digital backs for medium format cameras are insanely so.
as far as I know those things have stayed pretty much vapourware, with the single exception of the Leica Digital Module-R which only works with the Leica R8 and R9. Shame, I always thought they were a neat idea, and TBH if I could get a digital back for my ME-F I quite possibly wouldnt have bought a DSLR.
So Ive received the camera today. Its still pretty hard to get my head around! Theres a few things that I still ont understand how to get to work properly.
On theAuto Opto Max 80- 200mm lens what does everything mean on it? Ive worked out that thw twisting click dial at the base of the lens is the Aperature, but thats about it.
(http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y20/jamie_pyrite/CIMG2512Large.jpg)
Whats everything mean on this?
(http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y20/jamie_pyrite/CIMG2517Large.jpg)
Same with this?
(http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y20/jamie_pyrite/CIMG2519Large.jpg)
Whats that little silver dial on the 80-200 lens do? It turns a little bit then springs back to where it was..
Also, what does it mean by the macro 1:6 and 1:7?! I tried focusing on an object earlier on closeup but it just wouldnt!
(http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y20/jamie_pyrite/CIMG2522Large.jpg)
Haha, what IS this? My guess is that its a filter.. BUT I cant seem to open the weird clear plastic case! Any idea?
(http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y20/jamie_pyrite/CIMG2521Large.jpg)
Whats the weird little rectangle with random black and white blocks on for?
Also, why is it with neither of the lenses can I focus in on anything from about.. 2 feet away?!
And why is it when I look through the viewfinder, everything is a bit dark and blurred except for inside the little circle in the middle where its light and crisp?
What is the use of the little button on the lower left? (when the lens is infront of you) I read its for previewing or something?
(http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y20/jamie_pyrite/CIMG2503Large.jpg)
(http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y20/jamie_pyrite/CIMG2507Large.jpg)
Heres the camera :)
Excuse my complete and utter noobishness here :) Ive done some googling around and nothing has helped me! Some help would be greatly appreciated! :D
EDIT: Oh, and when I look through the viewfinder there is some dirt in the little clear circle in the middle. How can I clean this off?
Thanks :)
http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_section/cpg_support_product.asp?id=1023
dirt in the view finder-pentaprism area youre going to have to just live with, unless you have it professionally serviced. It wont affect the image.
Numbers like 1.8, 2.8,4, 8, 16 done double with lines are your f-stops. Smaller the number, the bigger the hole the light comes through, and thus a faster exposure. The lines show what the depth of field is at a certain f-stop.The button by the set of fstops closer to the body in silver will preview the depth of field by stopping down the aperture. Smaller fstop (bigger number) and you have greater depth or infinite depth of field, like a pinhole camera.
Green numbers are focal length. Smaller the number that you slide to, the wider the depth of field. The 80mm setting that your lens has is OK for portraiture.
Other than that, RTFM. :lol:
the filter case is a bastard to open. 7 day shop sometimes send them in those.
Basically one side is a really really thin lid.
its a case of gripping it with your fingertips and pulling it apart. Its a smooth side inside so doesnt need twisting though twisting may help break the seal.
check out this link for a PDF of the manual
http://www.olympusamerica.com/files/Oly_OM10.pdf
Thanks everyone :)
Few other things though.. Is what I see looking through the lens not supposed to be as clear and "real" as what I see through the centre circle? Or am I doing something wrong here?
So I have a 50mm and a 80-200mm lense. What else would you recommend?
:rofl:
Turn the focus ring till it goes clear.
;) Im not that stupid! Cheeky bugger! :lol:
(http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y20/jamie_pyrite/CIMG2527Large.jpg)
(http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y20/jamie_pyrite/CIMG2529Large.jpg)
Taking photos through the viewfinder with my digital camera.. Kind of shows what I mean.
It will never be crystal clear, as youre looking at a ground glass image. Nevertheless, Olympus OM series are renowned for a bright viewfinder. Im not sure if theres an f-stop DOF preview lock on the OM-10 lenses, meaning that the lens stops the aperture down when you turn the aperture ring, as opposed to stopping down only during the instant the pic is taken or when you press a preview button.
Ive had that problem before with a broken lens that wouldnt open up to full aperture (it was stuck on f16). Hopefully thats not whats causing it for you.
is the lens properly engaged in the mount?
Im not sure how the OM bayonet works but with my Pentax cameras if the lens isnt quite properly clicked home then the lens stays stopped all the way down and you get a very dark image. Might be worth checking the section of the manual on mounting/demounting lenses to make sure you are doing it right.
Maxi is right the viewfinder on the OM series was one of its major selling points, so it really ought to look better than that.
The image from the photos I took isnt always that dark. I took them in a pretty low light situation and hadnt pressed the F Stop preview button thing in.
Its definately locked in properly :) Ive checked the manual and its right.
Also, I just checked and through the viewfinder, its the same on the spare body I received too! Hmm..
Think itd be a good idea taking it to my local camera shop and asking them to have a look at it?
Just looked at the manual and discovered its meant to be clearer and lighter in the centre circle! Haha
Quote from: maximusotterhttp://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_section/cpg_support_product.asp?id=1023
dirt in the view finder-pentaprism area youre going to have to just live with, unless you have it professionally serviced. It wont affect the image.
Numbers like 1.8, 2.8,4, 8, 16 done double with lines are your f-stops. Smaller the number, the bigger the hole the light comes through, and thus a faster exposure. The lines show what the depth of field is at a certain f-stop.The button by the set of fstops closer to the body in silver will preview the depth of field by stopping down the aperture. Smaller fstop (bigger number) and you have greater depth or infinite depth of field, like a pinhole camera.
Green numbers are focal length. Smaller the number that you slide to, the wider the depth of field. The 80mm setting that your lens has is OK for portraiture.
Other than that, RTFM. :lol:
just to add to the above the red R is for infra red film, for visable light you lline the green line up with the distance the area that in the cetnter of foucus is. but is using IR film you would use the red line, and ignore the focus in the viewfinder.