Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] Re MF VS 35

Subject: Re: [OM] Re MF VS 35
From: Dawid Loubser <dawid@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 21:37:23 +0200
There is absolutely no question about the fact that a Nikon F, and the  
early Nikkors, are of much superiour construction quality to any OM  
camera.

* I had an OM fall a mere 40cm onto a tile floor (a "gentle" fall),  
and the shutter speed mechnism was totally broken
* My 1995 OM-3Ti has required service twice to keep accurate slow  
shutter speeds, my Nikon F has never been services since 1970
* Squeeze almost any OM lens, and the focusing resistance changes  
(even becomes impossible to focus on some lenses) - squeeze a Pre-Ai  
1960 Nikkor lens with all your might and it stil focuses smoother than  
any OM lens

Let's not delude ourselves. If this doesn't suffice, try opening up  
both an OM and a Nikon F, and you'll see a massive difference inside.
The OM's are still sexier, and the OM lenses render nicer.

Dawid


On 24 May 2012, at 6:47 PM, Bill Pearce wrote:

> Since when are OM's less reliable than Nikon F's? I keep hearing  
> this old
> crap, let me tell you, I have owned and shot professionally both  
> systems,
> still have some of both, and have never noticed any difference in  
> durability
> or reliability between the two. It would seem that the Nikons have  
> more
> ability to shrug off abuse, but since when should we abuse  our  
> equipment in
> the first place? And that's not to say that I haven't banged mine both
> around some.

-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz