Comparison of the Nikon FM to the Olympus OM1n
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 1 авг 2024
- Which is the better choice in 2023: The Nikon FM or the Olympus OM1n?
My email: jlvphoto@yahoo.com
My Nikon FM video: • Features, Controls and...
My Olympus OM1n video: • Features, Controls and... 
Наука
![J.P., NLE Choppa - Bad Bitty (Remix) [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/rBDa6BCvw10/mqdefault.jpg)
Olympus has been my choice since mid 70s. Great video.
Thanks Anthony. I never owned one until recently, but I always thought they were great cameras.
Great points. I had an Olympus but it had a problem with light leaks and later the film advanced. I got it from a friend, but because of those problems I really didn’t get a chance to appreciate it. I have now an FM. The light meter doesn’t work but I can shoot without it. As I primarily shoot B&W with film. I have a handheld meter too. I may get the FM2 next to go with my film camera setup.
Thank you. Did you ever consider the FE2? I just did a video on it.
Hi Jules, really nice video. My first 2 cameras were a Minolta SRT 201 and my second a Nikon FM. I enjoyed using the Nikon more. I stayed with Nikon as the years passed. Still have these 2 cameras and both work just fine! I did buy a Minolta XD11, I don't have that camera anymore. Happy Thanksgiving!
Thank you. Happy Thanksgiving to you as well.
Beautiful cameras. I'd go with the OM-1.
They are beautiful cameras. Thanks for watching.
My first (non-point-and-shoot) film camera was Nikon N90 (F90). Do you have one, and would you be able to do a review of it? Also, your lens reviews are very interesting - both vintage and modern (Z mount). Would be nice to see more of that. Thank you and Happy Thanksgiving!
I have a video on the N90S. Search for it on my channel. My video for 11/29 is on the Olympus Zuiko 100mm 2.8. Happy Thanksgiving.
I own several of both. ❤❤
Thanks for watching
I really like the Olympus's shutter speed ring which makes all controls easily accessible on the lens. wish it became the dominant design honestly.
I agree. That’s also one of the reasons I like the Nikkormat. Thanks for watching.
When I decided to buy my first SLR in the late 80s I spent ages, I mean many weeks, deciding which to get. It was a major expenditure at the time and I wanted to get it right. I eventually narrowed it down to Nikon or Olympus, and for reasons I can't now remember went with Nikon.
I definitely didn't regret it but I do regret not at least trying an Olympus. I could have got a used one pretty cheaply in the 90s, and probably sold it for what I paid if I didn't get on with it.
Obviously there are still plenty of Olympus SLRs and lenses around for very reasonable prices so one day I'll probably end up buying one.
I had an F3 which I bought used and it came with a focusing screen with a diagonal split prism. Absolutely brilliant idea. Why didn't all cameras have them? Is there one in the Olympus range?
Olympus had at least 14 different screens, I sure at least one had the 45 degree split.
I have the screen with the 45° split now on my OM-4Ti. OM system was as professional as it can get. Any other comment is just foolish blabbery.
Great discussion. Never realized the OM1 came out in 1972. It has to be noted that the Nikon shutter is the reason for the slower frames per second rate. It seems to be more delicate do to the way it works. Lots of parts and stress on those metal strips. I have the FE2 with the honeycomb imprints on the blades. Don't know if that or the plane blades failed more frequently. I did own the Pentax Spotmatic F. Great camera except for the screw mount. Got lots of great pictures with that camera. It really had great lenses.
I had watch your post with interest because your deep knowledge and clear way to present details... In this case and for the first time I disagree with this comparison... In general this are two full manual cameras with a light meter included... In my humble opinion at this point all similarities ended... I start using a camera in 1964...(is better not to talk about my starting experiences, I don't make you laugh), but as I was getting better at, fell in love with the Olympus System. The Olympus OM1n is not a professional camera (again in my humble opinion). Taking pictures with it in exteriors and trying to use the classic Synchro-Sunlight is a nightmare due to x synchronizing at 1/60 sec. shutter speed as maximum. The way to set the Shutter is close to the Nikkormat FTn, no bad but a little off for the year made and after using both systems the quality of Zuiko lenses is not in par with the quality of the Nikkor, Canon or Pentax lenses of the time. I think more fair comparison of the OM 1 will be with the Nikkormat's (as the comparison don't involve the Shutters because one is made of metal with X at 1/125 sec. and the other is made of cloth and X at 1/60 sec.). I love your work and will be delight to see a comparison between the Nikon FE and the Nikkormat EL.. Thank you very much and I hope this comment don't create hard feelings...
Maybe not professional enough for you, (and your 'humble opinion') but Sir Chris Bonnington CBE used an Olympus Om1 when he climbed Mount Everest in 1975. How much more 'professional' does a camera have to be in order to survive the tallest (and possibly coldest) mountain in the world?
No hard feelings at all. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. I do think the Olympus is a professional camera, although not to the degree that the Nikon F, F2 and F3 are. The shutter is rated at 100,000 exposures just like the titanium shutter in the F and F2. You right concerning flash sync but the F top sync speed was only 1/60 and the F2 only improved that to 1/80 and the F3 sync speed was 1/80 as well. When I shot weddings I used a Hasselblad with leaf shutter lenses that synced up to 1/500. I always welcome comments even if you disagree with me. Also I never have a problem when someone corrects me when I’m wrong. Thanks for watching my videos. Have a happy thanksgiving.
I’d like to know what defines “professional” for you coming down to a camera system.
@@Javifoto that is a great question. I guess for me means a shutter capable of at least 100,000 exposures before failure interchangeable finders and availability of motor drives, with an extensive lens line. That doesn’t mean you can’t take profession pictures with any other camera.the most important thing is the person behind the camera.
I have an OM1 and I've been flirting with nikon cameras for some time.
There is one thing I would like to know better, that's lens quality. How do Olympus stack up to nikon lenses in image quality?
The things that have been pulling me to nikon side are:
- seems like its a sturdier body
- more body options (fm, fe and F lines have all the type of features you might wish. While on the OM you are stuck with very similar cameras. Lots of OM1 have broken meters (mine too). The only mechanicals are the 1 and 3, but the 3 is too expensive. totally not worth it)
- more famous lenses (are they better though?)
I really wanted a strong body with working light meter. :-(
On the other hand, I love the lens design on Olympus, beautiful, compact and nice images.
It's also usually cheaper than nikon.
This is what keeps me on Maitani's side.
Thanks for watching my video. The FM and FE series don’t have CDS cell meters so they are more likely to be in working order. As far as lenses. There are many more Nikon lenses available on the used market. I don’t think there is a big difference in quality, but Nikon has a bigger variety to choose from. Some are legendary like the 105mm 2.5, the 55mm 3.5 or 2.8 macro, the 180mm 2.8 and 200mm F4.0 Ai or Ais.
@@julesvuottosphotofocus4696 Yeah, the 105 and 200mm have been on my radar for a long time.
But I don't see a good wide angle from nikon, while the zuiko 24mm is amazing.
Also, the compactness of the zuiko lenses is really something. I love it, and also love how they are well thought as a system.
I would love to see some more comparisons on the lenses from both systems.
Fms battery chamber cracks rendering light meter os.Beautiful for metering in lowlight when working .Cant see om1s meter in lowlight and film transport can jam, so you have to take the bottom of to reset the cam or you lose your pics, love them both
As DavidDatura says, the Nikon FM was not a direct competitor to the Olympus OM-1 but rather a downsized Nikkormat respectively Nikon EL2 to cope with the Canon AE-1 which appeared 1976, so only one year earlier than the FM and two years than the FE. In contrast the OM-1 had been the first pro SLR by Olympus and therefore was hard-faced with interchangeable focus screens and optionally upgradable with a simple winder like the FM or a full-featured motor drive for 36 or 250 exp back parts - just like the 1976 upcoming Pentax MX. The OM-1 was a direct affront against the bulky pro cameras Nikon F2 and Canon F1; the same intention had the Pentax MX: setting out to prove the ability to make pro cameras as slim as amateurs like it. But both fell short: they were failure prone - especially with their "pro motor drives". I had the OM-1 and the Pentax MX in parallel to the Nikon F, F2, Nikkormat/Nikon EL2 and FM/FE/FM-2 and FE-2: OM-1 and MX made lots of troubles with film advance, film rewind, flash synch, short circuits, and infirm mechanics. So I never abandoned the sturdy bunch of half a dozen Nikons for serious work. Maybe an OM-1 and an MX are a welcome opportunity for street photographers thanks to their lightweight, but to professionals they have been & are regarded as 'lightweights' in a different, not very complementary sense up to now. @philosimot
In the future Canon F1
As soon as I find one at a reasonable price I will do a video. Thank you.
I think the OM-1 was Olympus’s pro/semi-pro model of the era. The Nikon FM was secondary to Nikon’s pro F2. That’s why the former has generally a better specification and more flexibility. I remember at the time Olympus cameras were popular with pro female photographers, due to the more compact size of the cameras and lenses.
Nikon FM/FE/FM2/FM2N/FE2 and FA, all have interchangeable Focusing Screens
The FM does not have interchangeable screens. The others do.
2:03 check out the differences between the Nikkor 35-70mm to the Olympus 35-70mm.... the Olympus is almost like a 50mm lens size.. the Nikon is fricking huge. Definitely twice as long, but nearing three times as long as the olympus.
I just bought a Nikon FE2 and compared it to my Olympus OM-2n. Besides the 1/4000th shutter speed on the Nikon... I basically like everything else better on the Olympus. I'm not going to sell the FE2, I think it's a really pretty camera and that 1/4000th shutter is really cool. But it's bigger than the Olympus, the lenses are bigger. The exposure comp you have to hit a tiny little button to change it, the Olympus it's where most cameras shutter speed dial is and it's easy to just flip it up or down. And myriad other reasons... the Olympus is just the quicker better camera.
[edit... and btw, I REALLY like the FE2, it's just very pretty and I love that I finally own a Nikon after owning Minolta and Pentax (and Olympus of course). It's just a really lovely camera. I like playing with it and fiddling with it. But if I had to choose one, the Olympus is the better camera... besides that ridiculous fast shutter speed]
stop bullshitting. You went through a whole video of how the Olympus is superior in every way. But then tried to keep it "academic" and give the pros and cons of why one might choose the Nikon. Please. The Olympus was and is the better system. Nikon held it's weight because it was in the market earlier and professionals had already decided THat was their camera and didn't want to reinvest in a whole new system. Olympus revolutionized the SLR market.. but Canon and Nikon already had too much of a stronghold. (btw... I just bought a Nikon FE2 as I commented below... going to keep it, and love it... it's just not the tiny VERY capable Olympus besides the shutter speed)
You are entitled to your opinion, but I wasn't bullshitting. I did not say the Olympus was superior in every way. The meter cells, flash sync speed, silver battery, LED's in the viewfinder for setting exposure, Shutter speed and aperture visible in the viewfinder are all advantages of the Nikon. The choice depends on the need of the photographer. Both are excellent cameras. Thanks for watching.
What? 😆
@@JoeLopez Oh... I said: "stop bullshitting. You went through a whole video of how the Olympus is superior in every way. But then tried to keep it "academic" and give the pros and cons of why one might choose the Nikon. Please. The Olympus was and is the better system. Nikon held it's weight because it was in the market earlier and professionals had already decided THat was their camera and didn't want to reinvest in a whole new system. Olympus revolutionized the SLR market.. but Canon and Nikon already had too much of a stronghold. (btw... I just bought a Nikon FE2 as I commented below... going to keep it, and love it... it's just not the tiny VERY capable Olympus besides the shutter speed)"