Re: [APML]: Why Om-1

[Wil Milan <wmilan@airdigital.com>]

Chris J Serio wrote:

> Why is everyone so involved with the om-1. What features does it have?
> Tell me a little about it. I have three SLR's. On of the is a newer Canon
> about 10 years old. The others are pentax's. A k1000 and an MV. Everyone
> take great photos and none of them are newer than 10 years old.

Several people have listed the advantages of the OM-1 (light weight, mirror
lock-up, etc.), and they're pretty much true though largely not unique to the
OM-1. At the risk of sounding like the Grinch, however, let me offer one
reason why the OM system may not be a good way to go for an all-around camera
system: the lack of modern lenses.

The Olympus factory lenses (known by the brand name of "Zuiko") were very
good lenses in their day, but to my knowledge Olympus OM lenses are still all
based on technology at least 10 years old. That means they have not kept up
with the huge advances in glass and lens technology in the last decade, and
it's those advances which have led to some of the amazing lenses now
available from makers such as Nikon and Canon. ED-glass lenses, for instance,
are fairly common today and they make some of the best wide-field astro
lenses ever made, but they are a fairly new development and you can't get any
from Olympus for the OM series.

The upshot of this is not that the OM series cameras are not good cameras. On
the contrary, they are excellent cameras and for prime-focus photography they
work great. But if you already use another camera system or are considering a
camera system for general photography and piggyback shooting, I would
consider something a bit more modern.

Wil Milan
--
"When I consider your heavens, the work of your fingers, the moon and the
stars which You have set in place, what is Man that you are
mindful of him, or the son of Man that you care for him?"  -- Psalm 8