OK, my silence must be broken.
1. Honestly, I believe that it is a fare price. If anything happened to
mine, I'd consider spending that much to get a replacement. (insurance
money, of course). Besides, it's still cheeper than a full-frame'd digital
wonder-brick that will be worth 1/4 the price in three years.
2. It may be similar to the OM-4Ti in many ways, but that's like saying a
Shelby Mustang GT is like a factory stock Ford Mustang--only more expensive.
3. I don't brag, I continue to be humbled by the generosity of others.
4. The OM-3Ti fills a very specific niche within the OM line-up. Let me
explain...
On rare occasion I am known to disappear for a few days into the wilderness
wherever that may be. I'm as "unplugged" (and some would suggest "unglued)
as can be. I like to travel light, that means I try to pack as minimal of a
kit possible. But the temperatures can be hot or they can be wintertime
cold. Back before digital erupted on the scene we used to talk about things
like this and the general concensus was that an OM-1 type of body was
probably ideal because of the mechanical shutter, but the body that won out
was the OM-2n as reaching that fine balance of reliability with feature-set.
The OM-3Ti is kinda like the OM-2n in that it is a hybridization between the
mechanical OM-1 and the more "modern" OM bodies. The OM-2n was unique in the
"ultimate reliability" category so that's why it won out. Where the OM-2n is
a fully-electronic camera with mechanical camera reliability, the OM-3Ti is
a reliable mechanical camera with electronic camera features!
The OM-3Ti is superior to the OM-2n in metering systems, OTF flash,
mirror-chamber sensors instead of prism sensors, viewfinder diopter
adjustments, film-advance lever, weather-sealing and being operational at
all shutter-speeds with a dead battery. Also, speaking of batteries, the
OM-3Ti's metering system is so light on battery use that the cells last much
longer even in extreme cold. The OM-2n obviously has an advantage in the
availability of auto-exposure, 2-minute auto OTF exposures, mirror pre-fire
and lower-price and higher-availability. But the OM-2n does suffer from
flaky ISO dial issues too... Obviously, the OM-4Ti has earned its chops
through the years as being just as, if not more reliable than the OM-2n, but
I believe the reputation of the original OM-4 tainted it a little and back
in the days that we discussed this stuff, the OM-4Ti was still rather pricy
too!
So, where I'm going with all this nonesense is that if I'm heading out
somewhere with just one OM body, the hands-down choice is the OM-3Ti.
That said, if I'm event shooting and packing motordrives and flashes while
having a couple of cameras hanging off my neck and shoulder, the preferred
choice is the OM-4T and the OM-2S. I'm not so proud as to not admit that I
use auto-exposure mode. I can auto-expose with the best of them. This is a
technology advance which I wholeheartily embrace under certain working
conditions.
On several occasions now, I've exclusively shot events with the OM-3Ti and
35mm F2.8 lens and high-speed film. What a wonderful LITTLE setup. This is
probably as close to a Leica as I'll ever get. Maybe someday I'll have an F2
lens or maybe not. Doesn't matter, because I'm perfectly happy with what I
have and I use it every chance I get. The OM-3Ti with 35-80 F2.8 lens is
another wonderful combination, but the weight and balance is totally
different and it's just a little harder to look "harmless" with it. Add the
MD2 and T45 flash and "harmless" is a foreign concept--children and small
animals run for cover.
So, to wrap this diatribe (prolonged discourse) up, let me just summarize:
The OM-3Ti is an unique camera within the OM line and is recognized as a
"collectable", but to the dedicated photographer represents the "best of the
breed." The camera is much more than the sum of its parts--and demands the
best from the photographer. It is not as easy to use as an electronic
wildabeast, as there is almost no automation to speak of, so the
photographer has to play a much more active roll in shooting the camera.
Are my pictures "better" with the OM-3Ti than the other OM bodies? Actually,
yes. It is specifically due to the above paragraph. The camera demands that
I step up to the plate and swing for the fences. There are no "base hits"
with this camera--it's an all or nothing camera. Then there is also the part
about "raised expectations." This is the self gnawing thing where you know
you have a special camera so you work extra hard to get the most out of it.
A mere "snapshot" is kinda below it.
I got home about 0530 this morning from a late-night fiber-optic maintenance
that had me across the state. When I walked in I saw the magical package
from the Fuji processing center containing three rolls of developed Provia
100F. Of course, I had to run them through the viewer before going to bed.
:) Are you nuts? Duh! Let them wait? I don't think so.... Anyway, there
were several shots taken with the OM-3Ti and 35-80 F2.8 that stood out from
the rest as being direct examples of what I just wrote. Knowing what I had
meant that I worked extra hard to get the shot absolutely right. The rewards
are great.
AG Schnozz
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|