OM4(Ti) unreliable?
Ton Maas
I've been considering to get a 2nd hand OM4Ti to replace one of my OM2's,
in order to combine my range of Zuikos (2.8/24, 2.8/28, 3.5/50, 1.2/55,
4.0/80, 2.0/85, 2.0/90 - my favorite lens - and 3.5/135) with spot metering
[the blessings of which I recently discovered while working with a Leica R5
which was given to me by a friend]. There are a few OM4Ti's on sale around
town, but the problem is that my own trusted dealer _plus_ another
(reputable) retailer I've known for a long time have adviced me against it.
They both claim that the OM4 and even the OM4Ti are not very reliable both
mechanically (shutter problems) and electronically (mysterious drain on
batteries) and that I should go for an OM3(Ti) if I want to stick with my
Zuikos. The alternative would be to go for a nice 2nd hand 2.0/90 Summicron
for my "new" R5, which I could get at a decent price.
Are they right in questioning the quality of the OM4(Ti)? I mean, I've
never had any serious problems with my one OM1 and two OM2's in the
25+years I've owned them, and now these guys tell me that they've seen a
_lot_ of problems (plus expensive repairs) with the OM4(Ti).
Ton (desperately hoping for better news ;-)
ClassicVW
had any serious problems with my one OM1 and two OM2's in the 25+years I've
owned them, and now these guys tell me that they've seen a _lot_ of problems
(plus expensive repairs) with the OM4(Ti).
>
>Ton (desperately hoping for better news ;-)
>
another, and presently own OM 4T, PC, 77, 10, and G. I just sold a 4, and it
had seen much use, with no problems. I have heard of a battery drain problem in
the OM-4
( NOT the 4Ti) and OM-PC, but have never experienced it with mine. Some people
said the drain problem consisted of the batteries dying in six months without
using the camera. Ask yourself, even if you had this problem,( the two
batteries cost $1.19 each,) is it a huge problem?
I have NEVER heard of an OM body, especially the single series (1,2,3,4)
having an unreliable shutter. I think the camera salesman would rather scare
you into buying a $1600 camera, rather than sell you a good used body for the
price of $100 - $250. Find another camera shop. Also consider the OM-2000 at
about $179 brand new.
MANY Olympus questions are in the Olympus FAQ site. You can get there thru
www.astro.wellesley.edu/hawkins/photo
/photo.shtml
a particularly good link from there is to the Olympus mailing list (discussion
group) where you can ask or search the archives for the answer to any question.
Good Luck
George S.
WKato
>town, but the problem is that my own trusted dealer _plus_ another
>(reputable) retailer I've known for a long time have adviced me against it.
>They both claim that the OM4 and even the OM4Ti are not very reliable both
>mechanically (shutter problems) and electronically (mysterious drain on
>batteries) and that I should go for an OM3(Ti) if I want to stick with my
>Zuikos. The alternative would be to go for a nice 2nd hand 2.0/90 Summicron
>for my "new" R5, which I could get at a decent price.
I've owned Olympus for 20+ years and there seems to have been a chronic battery
drain problem with OM4 but not the OM4Ti and a sticky shutter magnet with the
OM10 but no other chronic problems. I haven't seen a more useable spot metering
system than the OM4 system. And I don't see how you could better your 90/2
Zuiko (at least to any significant degree).
lcl...@carroll.com
ton...@xs4all.nl (Ton Maas) said:
>Are they right in questioning the quality of the OM4(Ti)? I mean, I've
>never had any serious problems with my one OM1 and two OM2's in the
>25+years I've owned them, and now these guys tell me that they've seen
>a _lot_ of problems (plus expensive repairs) with the OM4(Ti).
Nonsense. You would do better to find another, more honest, dealer. Try
B&H.
les clark
-----------------------------------------------------------
lcl...@carroll.com
-----------------------------------------------------------
MIKE235684
hearing aid batteries high) but this was apparently cured in the OM4Ti. Build
quality and reliability are high on the list of OM4Ti requirements. I would
not take these opinions as gospel. YMMV....
Mike.
Markus Brauer
I owned a large amount of Olympus stuff (especially their nice macro system)
including OM-4 cameras some years ago. Batteries died within max. two
months, the Olympus motor is as loud as a chainsaw and the service in
Germany is extremely poor.
I sold everything to get a Nikon, although I missed (and still miss) the
multi-spot metering, which is probably the best system ever made (also liked
the hilight/shadow system).
Unfortunately the optical quality of many Zuikos is quite low, especially
the brilliance.
If you can afford it, get more lenses for your Leica and you will soon sort
out some Zuikos...
I had no reliability problems with the OM4 except the battery drain. Today I
would prefer the Ti version or the OM3.
Regards,
Markus
Ton Maas schrieb in Nachricht ...
>Hi,
>
>I've been considering to get a 2nd hand OM4Ti to replace one of my OM2's,
>in order to combine my range of Zuikos (2.8/24, 2.8/28, 3.5/50, 1.2/55,
>4.0/80, 2.0/85, 2.0/90 - my favorite lens - and 3.5/135) with spot metering
>[the blessings of which I recently discovered while working with a Leica R5
>which was given to me by a friend]. There are a few OM4Ti's on sale around
>town, but the problem is that my own trusted dealer _plus_ another
>(reputable) retailer I've known for a long time have adviced me against it.
>They both claim that the OM4 and even the OM4Ti are not very reliable both
>mechanically (shutter problems) and electronically (mysterious drain on
>batteries) and that I should go for an OM3(Ti) if I want to stick with my
>Zuikos. The alternative would be to go for a nice 2nd hand 2.0/90 Summicron
>for my "new" R5, which I could get at a decent price.
>
>Are they right in questioning the quality of the OM4(Ti)? I mean, I've
>never had any serious problems with my one OM1 and two OM2's in the
>25+years I've owned them, and now these guys tell me that they've seen a
>_lot_ of problems (plus expensive repairs) with the OM4(Ti).
>
Acer Victoria
low, especially the brilliance.<<
Eh? Whot's that all about? Zuikos are fine pieces of glass! Maybe if
you're comparing them to Leitz or Zeiss, but then the benchmark itself
should tell you what a gem you have....
/Acer "Zuikoholic" Victoria
--
"Strong in the heart, weak in the flesh...." --Def Leppard
"video meliora proboque, deteriora sequor." --Ovid
http://student.ucr.edu/~siddim01/ <--don't visit just yet!
Markus Brauer
>>Markus wrote: >>Unfortunately the optical quality of many Zuikos is quite
>>low, especially the brilliance.<<
>>
>>Eh? Whot's that all about? Zuikos are fine pieces of glass! Maybe if
>>you're comparing them to Leitz or Zeiss, but then the benchmark itself
>>should tell you what a gem you have....
>>
>>/Acer "Zuikoholic" Victoria
Yap. I AM comparing to Leica lenses. But even compared to modern Nikkors
they are not very brilliant, in my opinion. If you are fine with them - hey,
that's OK!
Pauls0627
>they are not very brilliant, in my opinion
What do you mean by "brilliant" in respect to the lens? To me a "bright" lens
is one with a large maximum aperture. Olympus has manufactured some spectacular
fast teles and wides over the years (most, if not all, still available new). I
suspect I am missing your meaing of the word "brilliant" here.
Paul
Jan Steinman -- jan AT bytesmiths DOT com
<markus...@knuut.de> wrote:
> Ton Maas schrieb in Nachricht ...
> >Hi,
> >
> >I've been considering to get a 2nd hand OM4Ti to replace one of my OM2's,
> >in order to combine my range of Zuikos (2.8/24, 2.8/28, 3.5/50, 1.2/55,
> >4.0/80, 2.0/85, 2.0/90 - my favorite lens - and 3.5/135) with spot metering
> Unfortunately the optical quality of many Zuikos is quite low, especially
> the brilliance.
Yea, dump those Zuikos! I'll give you $200 for the lot, and you'll be much
better off! Besides, what do magazine reviewers know, compared to Markus?
You know, the magazine reviewers who wrote that Zuikos were consistently
above other Japanese glass, and close to the best German glass -- but what
do they know, anyway? :-)
> >... the problem is that my own trusted dealer _plus_ another
> >(reputable) retailer I've known for a long time have adviced me against it.
> >They both claim that the OM4 and even the OM4Ti are not very reliable both
> >mechanically (shutter problems) and electronically (mysterious drain on
> >batteries)...
The OM-4T does not have the battery drain problem that plagued the plain
OM-4. I've taken over 10,000 frames with Olympus OM-(2, 2n, 4, 4T) gear
over the years, and NEVER had a mechanical problem. The ONLY problem I had
was a lock-up while shooting the 1980 Winter Olympics at -10 degrees. The
camera (OM-2n) unlocked after a few hours indoors, and I kept it inside my
jacket for the rest of the cold weather without problem.
--
: Jan Steinman -- Jan AT Bytesmiths DOT com
: Bytesmiths -- digital artistry <http://www.bytesmiths.com/Art_Gallery>
: +1 503 635 3229
Pál Jensen
Jan@Bytesmiths_nospam.com (Jan Steinman -- jan AT bytesmiths DOT com)
>Besides, what do magazine reviewers know, compared to
>Markus?
> You know, the magazine reviewers who wrote that Zuikos were
consistently
> above other Japanese glass, and close to the best German glass -- but
what
> do they know, anyway? :-)
Olympus lenses can't be any good. They are not used by professionals.
They have the wrong name. They are not Nikon or Canon.
Its mostly psychological. Its that Nikon vs. Canon syndrome. Most
amateurs won't consider anything else "'cause the pros aren't using it".
This despite of the fact that the Olympus OM-series exhibits more sheer
engineering brilliance than anything made by Nikon or Canon.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
C Lanier Benkard
Sounds like bullshit to me. No offense, but in my experience local
camera store personnel know pathetically little about cameras and
photography. I owned an OM-2n and OM-4 for many years. The OM-4 is a
beautiful camera and *still* has among the best metering systems ever
made. I even took my OM-4 on a winter climbing expedition once in
which the temperatures frequented -40F and had absolutely no problems
with it. Since my OM gear was stolen, I have owned both Contax
(167mt, AX, and Yashica FX-3) and Canon (EOS-3: after 15 years finally
another camera body with multi-spot metering!) gear and I would say
only the Contax 167mt had the build quality to match the OM-4. Most
modern systems just aren't all that mechanically sound. Also, the
battery drain problem is overrated: it just means you change the
batteries every six months or so if you don't use the camera, and
besides it's been eliminated AFAIK. BTW I second the motion on using
B&H. Ask them what they think about the OM-4T and they'll give you a
straight up answer.
Lanier
Ton Maas (ton...@xs4all.nl) wrote:
: Hi,
:
: I've been considering to get a 2nd hand OM4Ti to replace one of my OM2's,
: in order to combine my range of Zuikos (2.8/24, 2.8/28, 3.5/50, 1.2/55,
: 4.0/80, 2.0/85, 2.0/90 - my favorite lens - and 3.5/135) with spot metering
: [the blessings of which I recently discovered while working with a Leica R5
: which was given to me by a friend]. There are a few OM4Ti's on sale around
: town, but the problem is that my own trusted dealer _plus_ another
: (reputable) retailer I've known for a long time have adviced me against it.
: They both claim that the OM4 and even the OM4Ti are not very reliable both
: mechanically (shutter problems) and electronically (mysterious drain on
: batteries) and that I should go for an OM3(Ti) if I want to stick with my
Charles F Seyferlich
>
> Hi,
>
> I've been considering to get a 2nd hand OM4Ti to replace one of my OM2's,
> in order to combine my range of Zuikos (2.8/24, 2.8/28, 3.5/50, 1.2/55,
> 4.0/80, 2.0/85, 2.0/90 - my favorite lens - and 3.5/135) with spot metering
> [the blessings of which I recently discovered while working with a Leica R5
> which was given to me by a friend]. There are a few OM4Ti's on sale around
> town, but the problem is that my own trusted dealer _plus_ another
> (reputable) retailer I've known for a long time have adviced me against it.
> They both claim that the OM4 and even the OM4Ti are not very reliable both
> mechanically (shutter problems) and electronically (mysterious drain on
> batteries) and that I should go for an OM3(Ti) if I want to stick with my
> Zuikos. The alternative would be to go for a nice 2nd hand 2.0/90 Summicron
> for my "new" R5, which I could get at a decent price.
>
> Are they right in questioning the quality of the OM4(Ti)? I mean, I've
> never had any serious problems with my one OM1 and two OM2's in the
> 25+years I've owned them, and now these guys tell me that they've seen a
> _lot_ of problems (plus expensive repairs) with the OM4(Ti).
>
> Ton (desperately hoping for better news ;-)
They most likely are questioning the quality of Olympus cameras because
they do not sell them. Asking most photo dealers what the best camera is
is kind of like asking a Ford dealer what the best automobile is. What
they sell - AND what they make the most $$ on is best. I am not so sure
I would even trust a dealer I know to answer that question.
I understand the OM2 Program and some OM4t cameras had an electrical
problem that resulted in fast battery drain.
I had a brand new OM2 Program that used 3 batteries to get through a
couple of rolls of film. But, I also had OM4T, OM4Ti and OM1 cameras
that never gave me a bit of problem. I consider the spot metering of the
OM4T(i) to be one of the best metering systems in a 35mm camera.
Godfrey DiGiorgi
a very fine camera with the same excellent lenses, a brilliant metering
system.
My choice was to go back to Nikon about 22 years ago or buy an OM-4 and
I went the Nikon route, have never regretted it, but it wasn't due to
any qualms about Olympus quality. The Olympus cameras are not as heavily
built as the Nikon F3/FM2n, perhaps, but they are right there in general
use. The lens system is quite comparable where some Zuikos are better
than some Nikkors and vice-versa, but it's mostly a toss-up.
I still have a few Olympus cameras and still find them to be super
quality photographic instruments. The OM-3Ti is a very appealing camera
to me, I like mechanically timed shutters.
(So why did I go Nikon? Well, I started with Nikon in 35mm SLRs and find
the manual focus cameras' controls/feel suits my hands a little better.
Also, the F3's high-eyepoint viewfinder and interchangeable finder heads
are invaluable to my glasses-necessary eyes. Were I to switch from Nikon
at this point it would be to a Contax RTS III and Zeiss lenses, as those
are the only SLRs that suit my hands and eyes better then an F3 that
I've experimented with. But doing so would mean losing the
interchangeable finders, which I don't want to do...)
Godfrey
John Hermanson
modern cameras have some kind of battery drain). From a service standpoint
I've found the 4T & 4Ti (identical except for cover markings) are very
reliable.
--
John
----------------------------------------------------------------
Camtech / Olympus Service since 1977
21 South La., Huntington NY 11743-4714
516-424-2121
http://www.zuiko.com
--------------------------------------------------------------
Ton Maas <ton...@xs4all.nl> wrote in message
news:B3A557FD9...@0.0.0.0...
Joseph Albert
Godfrey DiGiorgi <rama...@apple.com> wrote:
>My choice was to go back to Nikon about 22 years ago or buy an OM-4 and
>I went the Nikon route, have never regretted it, but it wasn't due to
>any qualms about Olympus quality. The Olympus cameras are not as heavily
>built as the Nikon F3/FM2n, perhaps, but they are right there in general
>use.
I think the OM-4T is a more rugged construction than the compact Nikon's
but not up to the standards of the F3.
>The lens system is quite comparable where some Zuikos are better
>than some Nikkors and vice-versa, but it's mostly a toss-up.
The difference between Nikon and Olympus lens lines is not one of
quality, but one of coverage. Nikon has made far more different types
of lenses than Olympus. The main decision between the two has to do
with whether the Zuiko lens line will meet your needs in terms of
functionality. There are many more zooms available in Nikon mount,
both from Nikon and from 3rd party companies who no longer support
OM mount very well with their offerings. Nikon is many more types
of fast telephotos like 600/4, 400/3.5, 800/5.6, 200-400/4 for example.
The Olympus fast glass telephotos are quite good, but a bit heavy for
the focal lengths, and not long enough for bird photography. The 350/2.8
would be fine for mammals, but a 300/2.8 Nikkor will be a couple of
lbs lighter weight.
Olympus macros are absolutely first rate.
Wide-angles are a funny comparison between Zuiko and Nikkor. With Olympus,
you can get 21/2, 24/2, 28/2, all floating element designs (for close focus
aberration correction), and with Nikon you have 24/2, 28/2, 35/1.4, 28/2.8,
20/2.8 and 24/2.8 having floating element designs, at least in AIS lenses.
The AI f/2.8 Nikkor wide angles are conventional retrofocus designs.
with Olympus, there is no 35/1.4, and the 21/3.5, 24/2.8, 28/3.5, and 28/2.8
all lack floating elements.
A few observations here:
floating elements matter for shooting wide open at close range. with
Olympus, you pay less for a f/2.8 wide angle and get a fine quality lens,
but one that will have close focus aberrations wide open. this reflects
Olympus user base being more often amateurs. Nikon wants to offer pros
a cheaper alternative to f/2 wide angles while still offering close focus
correction. The f/2.8 zuikos are more compact and lighter weight as a result
also. The 21/3.5, but virtue of a more modest aperture, probably doesn't
need floating elements. the image of the 24/2.8 Zuiko falls apart around
the edges at f/2.8 and close range focus, but not many people shot it in
this situation.
Olympus still offers the f/2 lenses for a more pro-oriented customer,
and these are comparable to the f/2 Nikkor wide-angles. Olympus has
a very high quality and very expensive 21/2 and nikon has no such lens,
Olympus doesn't have a 35/1.4 as nikon does.
So, both wide angle offerings will support an uncompromising pro very well
with f/2 wide angle lenses. A more cost-conscious pro probably will
prefer the f/2.8 Nikkors for the wide-open performance, and a hiker or
someone more concerned about compactness and light weight will prefer the
slower Zuiko wide lenses.
The 21/3.5 Zuiko is probably overpriced as it costs nearly as much as
the 20/2.8 AIS-Nikkor even though the 21/3.5 lacks floating elements.
on the other hand, the 21/3.5 Zuiko is an incredibly sharp and contrasty
lens by f/5.6, and not bad wide open. It is hands down better than
the 24/2.8 Zuiko also, though the 24/2.8 Zuiko is Olympus' least desirable
wide-angle lens in terms of image quality, imho.
JA
blu...@my-deja.com
"John Hermanson" <omt...@erols.com> wrote:
> Early 4s (mid 80s vintage) had higher battery
drain than todays 4Ti (and ALL
> modern cameras have some kind of battery
drain). From a service standpoint
> I've found the 4T & 4Ti (identical except for
cover markings) are very
> reliable.
> --
>
> John
>
Why do "ALL modern cameras have some kind of
battery drain"?
Steve
John Hermanson
one of the ICs inside. This is good, but most if not all these circuits
suffer from some kind of "leakage" which allows the batteries to drain. It
is not that noticeable in cameras that use the big 3V lithium batteries
(that are as big as AAs), but in a camera like the 4T that relies on the
tiny MS76s, battery life is noticeable.
--
John
----------------------------------------------------------------
Camtech / Olympus Service since 1977
21 South La., Huntington NY 11743-4714
516-424-2121
http://www.zuiko.com
--------------------------------------------------------------
<blu...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:7n2c3v$2nt$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
Takako Day
Bob Day
I hope I am not interrupting anything and this is the correct forum, please excuse me if it isn't.
I have some used OM4 equipment I'm not using, if anybody is interested please email me directly.
I live close to DFW.
Thank you,
Bob
nospam
> I hope I am not interrupting anything and this is the correct forum, please
> excuse me if it isn't.
> I have some used OM4 equipment I'm not using, if anybody is interested please
> email me directly.
> I live close to DFW.