The OM's cloth shutter is very well working. I think one to look at is the Cosina CT-1 and its derivatives all the way to CT1 EX.. Great mechanical shutter PK mount cameras.
Great review of this camera. I purchased one of these cameras with the sole intention of getting the 40mm f1.8 lens. I have three of these lenses (one of my favorite), but in each case it came with a camera since it was cheaper to get them together than purchasing only the lens. I have an appreciation for Konica cameras and have since purchased the T3. I do not find too much difference between the TC and T3 other than the build quality and a few additional functions. I started to use the TC often since it provides great photos. It is difficult to compare it with the OM-1. I prefer the build of the OM-1 which is all around smoother and feels like a quality camera. In terms of lenses I have a hard time comparing them; apples and oranges, but both great.
Shalom from another desert - Phoenix. Very nice review of a great camera. Love the 40mm lens too. I originally learned to use SLRs on a Konica almost 5 decades ago. But you missed the Ricoh KR-1 as a compact mechanical competitor to the OM1 and TC. The KR-1 also has a copal square shutter. Just measured my KR-1 against my OM-1 and they are about the same size and weight. Build quality not as good on KR-1. I have all three bodies and love them all. Additionally, the best cheap solution to the mercury battery problem is 675 zinc air hearing aid batteries (1.4 volts and dirt cheap) plus a passive brass adapter (not expensive one resistors) available on eBay from multiple sellers at 2 for $10. Provides almost perfect exposure results without adjusting camera or ISO settings. Adjusting the ISO, as you suggest, is imperfect since the errors on meter caused by voltage inconsistencies are nonlinear, as I understand it. Adjustment needed will vary with the amount of available light. Unfortunately, the 675 batteries only last 3-5 months and can leak if left in camera too long.
You're totally right about the mercury battery issue. I'm just too lazy to do anything about it since I own so many cameras with reliable meters. I've never used a KR-1, though I do have a video review up of the XR-1, which I believe was Ricoh's first K-mount SLR.
Thank you for making this video. I check it once in a while and it's awesome that it's getting views. Eventually more people are learning about Konica. This comparison is great, but it's the T4 that *really* stacks up against the OM series. :) Also I can confirm the 50/1.7 is just as good regardless of the version. In fact the focus action is a bit quicker/smoother on the smaller versions. I initially shot the larger ones on my mirrorless, but nowadays use the smaller variety which I was not expecting. I personally don't feel like the Zuikos are better than Hexanons generally either... But the biggest, most unexpected factor to me is what a ROYAL PITA tearing down Zuikos is ... they're awful, or at least the 4 or 5 I've opened up. More contact cement in there than I've ever encountered. I gave up defungusing a 50/1.4 a while back because I was sick of fighting it with naphtha for hours. I let it win. lol
Its really nice and underrated camera. I bought a tc a couple of weeks ago since it was cheap and it came with some lenses i wanted for my t3n. I didnt plan to use the tc since my regards was low from what i heard before, i just wanted the lenses. But so far i must say i prefer the tc more. Its just such a joy to use and the things they removed from the t3 i havent really felt that i have missed
Great review! I agree that Hexanon's compact lenses (except for the 40mm) are not the highest quality, but the full size lenses I wouldn't trade for anything. Especially at the price point compared to other similar quality lenses. TC is great, I'm lucky to have found a T4 in box, so I have the compact + all the bells and whistles of the older T1-T3's. Love Konica.
I got both the 50mm 1,7 and the 40mm 1,8. While both phenomenally sharp. It is said that the 50mm 1,7 is one if not THE sharpest lens (ever?) made at the days. Love the 40mm more for its' lighter and shorter case
I’d disagree that anyone looking for a manual camera would automatically direct to the OM1, and that the Konica TC is only the poor man’s OM in your eyes. Nothing crappy about this camera.
My TC-4 is the right answer. Full range of shutter speeds, dof preview, multi exposure button, bright viewfinder, all in the same compact package as the TC. The bottom plate is made of brass.
Yup. T4 is aces. But worth noting that the earlier TC models had brass bottom cap as well. The polycarbonate they used for the plastic ones though is absolutely bombproof. I have fixed quite a number of both of these models and I've only ever seen one camera that had noticeable damage... but it worked fine. Just a hairline crack on the corner that looked like it'd been there for years.
17:35 The OM-3, which was introduced in the 80s was all-mechanical as well, even adding those sophisticated spot metering features of the OM-4. The only downside is the price of course...
@@BriansPhotoShow I started my analog adventure with an OM-1 (unused for years if not decades) that developed a shutter issue (capping). An OM-3 was not a suitable replacement for budget reasons. I had really fell in love with the OM system because of the nice lenses with the aperture ring at the front of the lens and the stop down button on the lens, not the camera. I then mad the decision to purchase an Nikon FE from a local shop and I don't regret that decision. I was suprised and even am by the build quality and the overall feel of the FE and the Nikkor lenses. I recently complemented the FE with a FM2n so that I now have an all mechanical camera again. The Pentax MX was also an option, but I didn't want to set up a new system again. Thank you Brian for your videos. I really enjoy watching them!
Very interesting video and certainly a very exciting camera. I own an OM-1 which I shoot a lot with, featured in two of my videos, but I have never tried this Konica. Would be an interesting side-by-side test. Thank you for sharing
I love my T3n - cost me about $30 last year with 3 lenses. Now similar cameras are going for at least 2-3 times that amount. The glass is great I think, and clearly people are starting to recognize the brand as an alternative to Canon, Nikon, Olympus etc
@@BriansPhotoShow I think it was pretty typical at the time. I have mixed feelings that prices have gone up so much! Glad to see the cameras/lenses getting recognition but also sad that if I need to replace it, it'll be that much harder. I haven't yet felt the need to "stock up" on spare camera bodies...I have 2 broken ones and another that only shoots wide-open with certain lenses, and not at all with others - but I have a 28mm f/2.8 on it that makes it a pretty fun setup.
BTW as we're at the thickness comparison. Consequently for the digital shooter the Konica adapters are thinner than those for the OM system. This makes using Konica lenses on mirrorless more compact especially with smaller cameras such as the Fuji X-E series cameras. Enjoyable.
Mine looks like hell, but it still works, and they are cheaper than dirt. But I bought several before I got one that worked. They are not very similar to the OM-1 to me, plastic, loud, and with a much worse focusing screen to me. I agree about the 40mm lens though, good luck finding one of those in OM mount. I like your historical price references.
Almost bought this camera last week, but I am just shooting more digital. Konica glass on the Fuji X series is an unreal combo. Edit: Recently tried the Konica 28mm 3.5 ver. 1, returned it immediately. Bought the ver. 3 and that lens DESTROYED the Pentax-M 28/2.8 and my KMZ Helios 35/2.8... Surprisingly, that last version of the Hexanon 28/3.5 matches the sharpness of my elusive Pentax-M 28/2.0!?! It might be the best 28mm lens in my bag all of the sudden. (To wit, I have 7 28's right now...) If you're looking for a good tech, google Computech Camera. Thank me later.
@@BriansPhotoShow Oops sorry Brian! Strangely I just saw this reply, TH-cam seems to have the strangest notification system-- generally I only get half of my notifications. The version I am referring to is the Hexanon AR 28 mm / F3.5 - 5 element late F22 version... It's astounding. In the process of comparing and contrasting approximately 20 Pentax and Konica lenses from various eras on my new full frame Sony A7R3; the Konica Hexanon 57mm 1.4 is also nice. Got the rare all black version for a song last week, but it's DEFINITELY not quite as sharp as the 28mm at f4...
@@jonlouis2582 Hexars were ealier lenses, and then later the more budget friendly options. The Hexanons... well there really isn't a bad bit of glass in the whole range; they're better-than-average at worst. The Pentax 28 he compared it to was the 28/2 not 28/2.8 ..... you're both right. The PK 28/2.8 is very meh IMO (I've had quite a few - they're ubiquitous), but the PK M 28/2 is one of the best pieces of glass I've had.... Nearly as good as the fabled FA31/1.8. And along those lines, the (much more expensive) Hexanon UC AR 28/1.8 is simply ridiculous good - every bit as good as the Pentax 31mm.
I finally managed to chase and buy OM1 I checked... It worked, so I carefully stored it... now it doesn't work ! The couple of OM10s I previously bought for around $20 each work perfect...
I picked up a Konica TC-X on Ebay for $36, on a whim. And because of its lightweight plastic body I've found that I tend to shoot it more often. It's not an amazing camera, but the only other plastic camera at a
The TC-X was made by Cosina. It's the same basic design as the Nikon FM10, Olympus OM2000 and a few other re-brands I can't think of at the moment. If it's in good working order, then it's certainly worth what you paid for it.
Hi Brian - I have the 40mm lens on my Konica FS1. Great camera. 4 AA batteries add weight but the built-in auto winder is a nice feature. Have you used one? Keep up the great work.
Wein makes non-mercury 625 and 675 1.35V batteries. Just picked up a T2 and Chinon SLR so I’ll test the shutter priority with the Wein batteries. The T2 has a cloudy viewfinder so I’m looking to get another Konica mechanical camera. Maybe the TC? Btw, the Chinon SLR is smooth beast! Heavier and smoother than the T2. Too bad the M42 lenses take more work to collect than the Hexanon ARs.
You don't need a Wein cell. Just a 675 sized zinc-air plain vanilla "hearing aid" battery, and a rubber o-ring to center it in the battery box (and in some you don't even need to o-ring - it'll stay put with friction from the contact in some cases). All the Wein is is a zinc-air cell in the 675 form-factor - they're just too overpriced IMO. The TC is great. The T4 is better. Both have brighter finders than T2. The FT-1 Motor has the brightest of all the Konica SLRs.... though none are the like of an OM-1 or Pentax MX etc., but plenty easy to work with. Re: Chinons, I've never had any reliability luck with Chinons. Have had three fail on me in catastrophic PCB ways. I gave up on them even though they were nice shooters. Probably peek at them again if I ever see an older one.
I Would add Minololta srt -series to this category. Also Built as a ”tank” and fully mechanical, besides the lightmeter which requires a mercury battery. Very similar to Olympus om-series.
@@BriansPhotoShow yes You are right. I have one OM-1 and it is conciderabley smaller. But Minolta srt is a good and relatively cheap camera if you want to try film photography. Good lenses and good quality.
The Ricoh KR-5 is all mechanical and quite small. Also late seventies. You need the Hexanon 135 f3.2. That's the best 135 of the three IMO. Quite sharp. The 50mm f1.4 (to f22) is also a very good lens. (The 50mm to f16 is radioactive)
I remember when the OM-1 was the poor mans Nikon FM-2. I just picked up a Konica TC with a 50mm 1.7 at the Goodwill for $9.00. I like it but no, it's no OM-1.
They grow on you. :) At least they did for me (particularly the T4, but I still shoot the TC). The finder isn't anywhere near as bright as an OM or Pentax MX... that's quite literally the only thing I'd nitpick. Everything else is just great about them. And Hexanons are just fantastic, better than Zuikos IMO... plus 20x easier to open and service compared to a Zuiko, which I'll never try and bother opening again.
If you know a genuine camera Technician, that fake leather covering can be repaired OR replaced altogether. It's not a tricky job. And some collectors just do it themselves. You camera then looks Brand New. As for meter issues. I'm a very old Senior Citizen. But I got many hundreds of excellent photos before the days of TTL meters simply by following the suggested exposure chart that used to be printed on the inside of the Kodak film box! So, find an old book with a chart to guide your exposure setting and just don't worry about that meter. Of course, I still have several fine hand held meters on hand in my "Kit" too. Either way, the meter shouldn't be much of an issue.
I keep recommending these to budget and beginning film photographers. IMO they're still the bargain to be found in the SLR world at this point. I've overhauled 3 or 4 now and sold them for 50 bucks to incredibly happy shooters. Weirdly, the TC is far, far more comfortable/enjoyable camera personally for me to shoot. I've owned a couple OM-1 varieties in the past and just never quite got with them - didn't dislike them whatsoever, just the handling wasn't my cuppa tea. Pentax MX was my compact shooter for many many years (still own two) but these days I shoot the TC (and moreso the T4) far more often.
I wouldn't consider myself a beginner. I have hugh quality cameras. Right niw tbis one is my choice for having with me everywhere i go. There are advantages to rhus camera. The biggest being the price. I found a 28mm objective for it for 40bucks and its awesome. Also most of these are in almost mint condition. Yiu can find a complete set with the standard lenses for under 100 ...i mean... The only Problem is the light meter...and thats the crux. You need to learn how to photograph without or use a extern.
First camera I inherited from dad. Beautiful review. Thanks for sharing!
Thanks for the effort! It was helpful.
Thank you for an excellent review of an iconic camera. Your thoughtful and detailed comparison of the Konica and OM1 and Canon AE-1 was fascinating.
My pleasure and I appreciate your kind words.
Why is the Konica Autoreflex TC the Poor Man's OM-1? The TC has a real shutter, unlike the OM1's cloth shutter. Hello?
The OM's cloth shutter is very well working. I think one to look at is the Cosina CT-1 and its derivatives all the way to CT1 EX.. Great mechanical shutter PK mount cameras.
Love your reviews, very in depth and clears up any questions I have.
I'm happy to he helpful!
Excellent review. Even Canon fitted a Copal square shutter to their EF.
Great review of this camera. I purchased one of these cameras with the sole intention of getting the 40mm f1.8 lens. I have three of these lenses (one of my favorite), but in each case it came with a camera since it was cheaper to get them together than purchasing only the lens. I have an appreciation for Konica cameras and have since purchased the T3. I do not find too much difference between the TC and T3 other than the build quality and a few additional functions. I started to use the TC often since it provides great photos.
It is difficult to compare it with the OM-1. I prefer the build of the OM-1 which is all around smoother and feels like a quality camera. In terms of lenses I have a hard time comparing them; apples and oranges, but both great.
Shalom from another desert - Phoenix. Very nice review of a great camera. Love the 40mm lens too. I originally learned to use SLRs on a Konica almost 5 decades ago. But you missed the Ricoh KR-1 as a compact mechanical competitor to the OM1 and TC. The KR-1 also has a copal square shutter. Just measured my KR-1 against my OM-1 and they are about the same size and weight. Build quality not as good on KR-1. I have all three bodies and love them all. Additionally, the best cheap solution to the mercury battery problem is 675 zinc air hearing aid batteries (1.4 volts and dirt cheap) plus a passive brass adapter (not expensive one resistors) available on eBay from multiple sellers at 2 for $10. Provides almost perfect exposure results without adjusting camera or ISO settings. Adjusting the ISO, as you suggest, is imperfect since the errors on meter caused by voltage inconsistencies are nonlinear, as I understand it. Adjustment needed will vary with the amount of available light. Unfortunately, the 675 batteries only last 3-5 months and can leak if left in camera too long.
You're totally right about the mercury battery issue. I'm just too lazy to do anything about it since I own so many cameras with reliable meters. I've never used a KR-1, though I do have a video review up of the XR-1, which I believe was Ricoh's first K-mount SLR.
@@BriansPhotoShow I actually meant the XR-1 not the KR-1. My bad!
Love this review. Totally agree on the 40mm lens and the use of this camera for street photogs.
Thank you for making this video. I check it once in a while and it's awesome that it's getting views. Eventually more people are learning about Konica.
This comparison is great, but it's the T4 that *really* stacks up against the OM series. :)
Also I can confirm the 50/1.7 is just as good regardless of the version. In fact the focus action is a bit quicker/smoother on the smaller versions. I initially shot the larger ones on my mirrorless, but nowadays use the smaller variety which I was not expecting. I personally don't feel like the Zuikos are better than Hexanons generally either... But the biggest, most unexpected factor to me is what a ROYAL PITA tearing down Zuikos is ... they're awful, or at least the 4 or 5 I've opened up. More contact cement in there than I've ever encountered. I gave up defungusing a 50/1.4 a while back because I was sick of fighting it with naphtha for hours. I let it win. lol
Yes, the T4 is a much nicer camera.
Its really nice and underrated camera. I bought a tc a couple of weeks ago since it was cheap and it came with some lenses i wanted for my t3n. I didnt plan to use the tc since my regards was low from what i heard before, i just wanted the lenses. But so far i must say i prefer the tc more. Its just such a joy to use and the things they removed from the t3 i havent really felt that i have missed
Yes, I feel much the same.
found this baby in 101 degree weather at a swapmeet for 75 bucks with a 200mm thanks for the video! gave me a chance to get to know this baby!
Glad I could help!
Great review!
I agree that Hexanon's compact lenses (except for the 40mm) are not the highest quality, but the full size lenses I wouldn't trade for anything. Especially at the price point compared to other similar quality lenses. TC is great, I'm lucky to have found a T4 in box, so I have the compact + all the bells and whistles of the older T1-T3's. Love Konica.
Sounds like you've got the ideal Konica setup. Nicely done!
I got both the 50mm 1,7 and the 40mm 1,8. While both phenomenally sharp. It is said that the 50mm 1,7 is one if not THE sharpest lens (ever?) made at the days. Love the 40mm more for its' lighter and shorter case
I have this camera that my dad left me i love it so much one of the memories i have of him its a beautiful camera
I’d disagree that anyone looking for a manual camera would automatically direct to the OM1, and that the Konica TC is only the poor man’s OM in your eyes.
Nothing crappy about this camera.
My TC-4 is the right answer. Full range of shutter speeds, dof preview, multi exposure button, bright viewfinder, all in the same compact package as the TC. The bottom plate is made of brass.
Yup. T4 is aces.
But worth noting that the earlier TC models had brass bottom cap as well. The polycarbonate they used for the plastic ones though is absolutely bombproof. I have fixed quite a number of both of these models and I've only ever seen one camera that had noticeable damage... but it worked fine. Just a hairline crack on the corner that looked like it'd been there for years.
17:35 The OM-3, which was introduced in the 80s was all-mechanical as well, even adding those sophisticated spot metering features of the OM-4. The only downside is the price of course...
Yes, the OM-3 is a bit of a rare bird, isn't it?
@@BriansPhotoShow I started my analog adventure with an OM-1 (unused for years if not decades) that developed a shutter issue (capping). An OM-3 was not a suitable replacement for budget reasons. I had really fell in love with the OM system because of the nice lenses with the aperture ring at the front of the lens and the stop down button on the lens, not the camera.
I then mad the decision to purchase an Nikon FE from a local shop and I don't regret that decision. I was suprised and even am by the build quality and the overall feel of the FE and the Nikkor lenses. I recently complemented the FE with a FM2n so that I now have an all mechanical camera again. The Pentax MX was also an option, but I didn't want to set up a new system again.
Thank you Brian for your videos. I really enjoy watching them!
I have one since 1987 and it's a darling 😊
Excelent Review !!!! 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
Very interesting video and certainly a very exciting camera. I own an OM-1 which I shoot a lot with, featured in two of my videos, but I have never tried this Konica. Would be an interesting side-by-side test. Thank you for sharing
I'd love to see a side-by-side TC vs. OM-1 comparison. If you do one, come back and post a link here!
@@BriansPhotoShow I will certainly give you a link if I end up doing such a video.
I love my T3n - cost me about $30 last year with 3 lenses. Now similar cameras are going for at least 2-3 times that amount. The glass is great I think, and clearly people are starting to recognize the brand as an alternative to Canon, Nikon, Olympus etc
That's one heck of a deal on the T3. Well done!
@@BriansPhotoShow I think it was pretty typical at the time. I have mixed feelings that prices have gone up so much! Glad to see the cameras/lenses getting recognition but also sad that if I need to replace it, it'll be that much harder. I haven't yet felt the need to "stock up" on spare camera bodies...I have 2 broken ones and another that only shoots wide-open with certain lenses, and not at all with others - but I have a 28mm f/2.8 on it that makes it a pretty fun setup.
BTW as we're at the thickness comparison. Consequently for the digital shooter the Konica adapters are thinner than those for the OM system. This makes using Konica lenses on mirrorless more compact especially with smaller cameras such as the Fuji X-E series cameras. Enjoyable.
Nice review but the om1 was not the only mechanical option of Olympus; they later also released the om3.
True, though the OM-3 was produced in far smaller numbers.
Mine looks like hell, but it still works, and they are cheaper than dirt. But I bought several before I got one that worked. They are not very similar to the OM-1 to me, plastic, loud, and with a much worse focusing screen to me. I agree about the 40mm lens though, good luck finding one of those in OM mount. I like your historical price references.
Nice video, Brian! Do you have the interview that you mentioned at 6:34?
As I recall, Juho from Camera Rescue talked about this in an interview with Nicholas Llasera, though I don't have a link handy.
I have one of those, but the lightmeter is broken... Still, I'm gonna try it out, sooner or later! ;)
Even a functioning light meter in one of these suffers from the mercury battery problem. I often shoot mine meterless.
Update: I had it calibrated for 1.5v batteries and I'm in the process of shooting a roll on it (finally!)
Almost bought this camera last week, but I am just shooting more digital. Konica glass on the Fuji X series is an unreal combo.
Edit: Recently tried the Konica 28mm 3.5 ver. 1, returned it immediately. Bought the ver. 3 and that lens DESTROYED the Pentax-M 28/2.8 and my KMZ Helios 35/2.8... Surprisingly, that last version of the Hexanon 28/3.5 matches the sharpness of my elusive Pentax-M 28/2.0!?! It might be the best 28mm lens in my bag all of the sudden. (To wit, I have 7 28's right now...)
If you're looking for a good tech, google Computech Camera. Thank me later.
When you say version 3 of the Hexanon 28/3.5, are you referring to the five-element version?
@@BriansPhotoShow Oops sorry Brian! Strangely I just saw this reply, TH-cam seems to have the strangest notification system-- generally I only get half of my notifications.
The version I am referring to is the Hexanon AR 28 mm / F3.5 - 5 element late F22 version... It's astounding.
In the process of comparing and contrasting approximately 20 Pentax and Konica lenses from various eras on my new full frame Sony A7R3; the Konica Hexanon 57mm 1.4 is also nice. Got the rare all black version for a song last week, but it's DEFINITELY not quite as sharp as the 28mm at f4...
Maybe yours is better, but my Pentax KM 28/2.8 is one of the very worst lenses I have ever tried to use. My Konica Hexar 28/2.8 isn’t much better.
@@jonlouis2582 Hexars were ealier lenses, and then later the more budget friendly options. The Hexanons... well there really isn't a bad bit of glass in the whole range; they're better-than-average at worst.
The Pentax 28 he compared it to was the 28/2 not 28/2.8 ..... you're both right. The PK 28/2.8 is very meh IMO (I've had quite a few - they're ubiquitous), but the PK M 28/2 is one of the best pieces of glass I've had.... Nearly as good as the fabled FA31/1.8.
And along those lines, the (much more expensive) Hexanon UC AR 28/1.8 is simply ridiculous good - every bit as good as the Pentax 31mm.
I finally managed to chase and buy OM1 I checked... It worked, so I carefully stored it... now it doesn't work ! The couple of OM10s I previously bought for around $20 each work perfect...
I picked up a Konica TC-X on Ebay for $36, on a whim. And because of its lightweight plastic body I've found that I tend to shoot it more often. It's not an amazing camera, but the only other plastic camera at a
The TC-X was made by Cosina. It's the same basic design as the Nikon FM10, Olympus OM2000 and a few other re-brands I can't think of at the moment. If it's in good working order, then it's certainly worth what you paid for it.
Great stuff on these Konicas! Do you know of anyone/shop that will repair/recalibrate these light meters for 1.5V batteries?
I use PR675 zinc air batteries and t works fine
Hi Brian - I have the 40mm lens on my Konica FS1. Great camera. 4 AA batteries add weight but the built-in auto winder is a nice feature. Have you used one? Keep up the great work.
I've never used an FS-1. I'm just not sure how reliable they are after forty years.
I think somebody was using the Canon A1 in the movie "The Thomas Crown Affair"
Wein makes non-mercury 625 and 675 1.35V batteries. Just picked up a T2 and Chinon SLR so I’ll test the shutter priority with the Wein batteries. The T2 has a cloudy viewfinder so I’m looking to get another Konica mechanical camera. Maybe the TC? Btw, the Chinon SLR is smooth beast! Heavier and smoother than the T2. Too bad the M42 lenses take more work to collect than the Hexanon ARs.
You don't need a Wein cell. Just a 675 sized zinc-air plain vanilla "hearing aid" battery, and a rubber o-ring to center it in the battery box (and in some you don't even need to o-ring - it'll stay put with friction from the contact in some cases). All the Wein is is a zinc-air cell in the 675 form-factor - they're just too overpriced IMO.
The TC is great. The T4 is better. Both have brighter finders than T2. The FT-1 Motor has the brightest of all the Konica SLRs.... though none are the like of an OM-1 or Pentax MX etc., but plenty easy to work with.
Re: Chinons, I've never had any reliability luck with Chinons. Have had three fail on me in catastrophic PCB ways. I gave up on them even though they were nice shooters. Probably peek at them again if I ever see an older one.
I Would add Minololta srt -series to this category. Also Built as a ”tank” and fully mechanical, besides the lightmeter which requires a mercury battery. Very similar to Olympus om-series.
The main innovation of the OM-1 was its compact size. The SRT's were not small.
@@BriansPhotoShow yes You are right. I have one OM-1 and it is conciderabley smaller. But Minolta srt is a good and relatively cheap camera if you want to try film photography. Good lenses and good quality.
The Ricoh KR-5 is all mechanical and quite small. Also late seventies.
You need the Hexanon 135 f3.2. That's the best 135 of the three IMO. Quite sharp.
The 50mm f1.4 (to f22) is also a very good lens. (The 50mm to f16 is radioactive)
I have both cameras and still prefer the Canon AE-1 and associated Canon lenses.
I remember when the OM-1 was the poor mans Nikon FM-2. I just picked up a Konica TC with a 50mm 1.7 at the Goodwill for $9.00. I like it but no, it's no OM-1.
You picked up a functioning camera and excellent lens for the price of a UV filter. Try that with anything that says Olympus on it.
They grow on you. :) At least they did for me (particularly the T4, but I still shoot the TC). The finder isn't anywhere near as bright as an OM or Pentax MX... that's quite literally the only thing I'd nitpick. Everything else is just great about them. And Hexanons are just fantastic, better than Zuikos IMO... plus 20x easier to open and service compared to a Zuiko, which I'll never try and bother opening again.
If you know a genuine camera Technician, that fake leather covering can be repaired OR replaced altogether. It's not a tricky job. And some collectors just do it themselves.
You camera then looks Brand New.
As for meter issues.
I'm a very old Senior Citizen. But I got many hundreds of excellent photos before the days of TTL meters simply by following the suggested exposure chart that used to be printed on the inside of the Kodak film box! So, find an old book with a chart to guide your exposure setting and just don't worry about that meter.
Of course, I still have several fine hand held meters on hand in my "Kit" too. Either way, the meter shouldn't be much of an issue.
Buying "Vintage" gear on Ebay?
I've found you need to use caution. I've paid good money for what was essentially a "spare parts" body!
I keep recommending these to budget and beginning film photographers. IMO they're still the bargain to be found in the SLR world at this point. I've overhauled 3 or 4 now and sold them for 50 bucks to incredibly happy shooters. Weirdly, the TC is far, far more comfortable/enjoyable camera personally for me to shoot. I've owned a couple OM-1 varieties in the past and just never quite got with them - didn't dislike them whatsoever, just the handling wasn't my cuppa tea.
Pentax MX was my compact shooter for many many years (still own two) but these days I shoot the TC (and moreso the T4) far more often.
Sunny 16!
I wouldn't consider myself a beginner. I have hugh quality cameras. Right niw tbis one is my choice for having with me everywhere i go. There are advantages to rhus camera. The biggest being the price. I found a 28mm objective for it for 40bucks and its awesome. Also most of these are in almost mint condition. Yiu can find a complete set with the standard lenses for under 100 ...i mean...
The only Problem is the light meter...and thats the crux. You need to learn how to photograph without or use a extern.
OM-3 is mechanical too.
and extremely rare.