The Olympus OM3. One of the most advanced mechanical shutter cameras ever made. It is also one of the rarest OM series cameras around as it was only produced for 3 years (1983-1986). As a result, it is often horded by collectors who sit them in glass display cases whilst watching the market value gradually increase.
It’s a shame, as this is a truly amazing camera which was designed from the ground up by Yoshihisa Maitani to take full advantage of the OM system as a modern professional camera body. It deserves to be used.

The OM3 was released along side the OM4 and OM2SP, so as a result shares some similarities. However, you could probably say it’s in many ways closer related to the OM1 which was also built with a mechanical shutter.  As a result, this is one of the main reasons why the OM3 was only produced for such a short period of time. In 1983, if people wanted a mechanical shutter body they had 2 choices in the OM system- the OM1n which was an older but tried and tested model, or the OM3 which was brand new and considerably more expensive. Most people chose the OM1n which was built until 1987.
The OM3 had alot going for it though. With it came an increased max shutter speed of 1/2000, iso settings from 6 to 3200, and a brand new very advanced metering which included the new multi-spot system (in addition to the regular single spot), which allowed the user to take a reading in the shadows and highlights then combine them both for an ideal exposure. All of this was displayed in a new Viewfinder that featured LCD display and a light (helpful for night shooting) which displayed detailed information on light readings and shutter speed etc. Besides all of this new technology, there remained the greatest advantage of all; that by using a mechanical shutter the camera could be operated at all shutter speeds without the need of batteries.

Of course, it must be said that with this new metering technology also came issues that worked against the cameras reputation. One of the biggest was battery life. Like the OM2SP and OM4, there were alot of cameras (not all) that chewed through batteries like they were candy. You can usually tell right away if your particular camera falls into this category by the need to replace the batteries after a weeks use. There is a common misconception that all of these models suffered from this problem which is completely false. I know people who have been using them for years without needed to replace batteries. I myself have been shooting an OM2SP for well over 8 months now with used batteries and it still functions perfectly. I haven’t had enough time to test the OM3 fully yet, but after shooting a roll (on yet again used batteries) and repeated use of the VF lights etc, it’s still holding up perfectly. On the odd chance of the batteries draining though i still can make use of the OM3’s biggest advantage – it’s mechanical shutter.

Getting hung up on the technicalities of these cameras can be a waste of time; almost as much as collecting them without the intention to take photos.
At the end of the day, It’s all about how good the camera is to use, and the OM3 carries on and in some ways improves the biggest advantages of the OM’s that proceeded it. This includes the gloriously large and bright viewfinder, compact body and user friendly function, attractive finish, looks, and construction, and the ability to use some of the greatest lenses ever created.
I have quite a few cameras now, and the OM3 is already amongst my all time favourites. However, i have to say that as good as it is, i think they’re overpriced, especially as a user camera. I’d actually have a had time justifying paying even half of the current market price for one of these. If you’re just looking for something to get into the wonderful OM system, there’s probably better options available to you. But, if you’re like me and find one for a fraction of the market value, snap it up and use it!
The OM3 is a great cameras to use, but i think mine will restricted to indoor use only and kept away from the street.. It’s just too pretty

For further reading you can can check out these links.
I’ve also tracked down the hard to find OM3 instruction manual that i have available for download here

The Olympus Pen EF is bit of an unusual camera. I originally saw this little guy covered in dust at a market last weekend. It stood out form the other cameras with its compact size, selenium light meter and flash. When i picked it up i noticed another interesting aspect. It’s a half frame camera. So i rescued it for $5.
As it turns out, the Pen EF is the last half frame camera released by Olympus. This is quite interesting, as it was the early 80’s at the time, and demand for the half frame format was essentially dead. Why Olympus chose to release a new model when the market was almost gone is a mystery, but im glad they did.
The Pen EF isnt exactly a “pretty” camera. It looks like bit of a Frankenstein with a mixture of two eras of camera technology crammed into a very compact body. The camera epitomizes simplicity. All you need to do is set the ASA (ranges from 25-400), wind the film on, then press the shutter. Thats pretty much it.
The flash is powered by a common AA battery (the camera still functions perfectly without a battery), and to activate the flash you pull a little latch down which engages it.
Besides the metering and flash, the Pen EF is lucky to benefit from a superb little 28mm D.Zuiko lens. Olympus had earnt a great reputation from their Zuiko glass for their half frame and full frame cameras, and the lens in the EF is no different. It still amazes me how manufacturers like Olympus could fit terrific little lenses in compact cameras (within a budget) that are still superior to many modern lenses that supposedly benefit from the latest and greatest technology.
Anyway, i shot a roll with this little beast the day after i got it, and it was alot of fun. It’s quite a strange experience having 72 shots on a roll of film. I hope to create some interesting Diptychs, and also see how large i can enlarge the half frames.
If you see a little Olympus Pen EF around, dont let it end up in the bin. It may not be the most attractive camera out there, but its certainly one of the most unique!

EDIT: Some recent shots from the little Pen EF.

Ok, havent posted up any film shots for a while.. No working film scanner means no scans. So you have to suffer through a couple more shots of new cameras than have found their way to me lately.

The first is a terrific 124G. Been liking this medium format thing lately, so i’ve bought my own camera just incase i have to give the RB67 back (im hoping my friend forgets i have it). The Yashica 124G is a 6×6 medium format TLR that was built in between 1971 and 1986. It has a very good reputation as an entry level medium format camera with an astounding 80cm f/3.5 Yashinon lens.
There is also a non “G” model (ie. Yashica 124), that appears to sell for considerably less than the 124G. They’re actually exactly the same except for the external finish of the camera. The optics are exactly the same, and there are rumours that the 124 has stronger internal gears than the 124G. Too bad i couldnt find a 124 anywhere for sale that was in working condition, luckily the 124G is still pretty cheap (if you look around a bit).
Heres a quick pic of it

I also got these 2 things for an offer i just couldnt refuse.
One is in amazing condition, the other nice and brassed up. I actually have something special planned for the “roughy”.

I got this little beast a while ago now, but have only got a chance to make a post about it today.
The Canon P (“Populaire”) was made between 1958 and 1961. It’s one of Canon’s last screw mount rangefinders and regarded by many as one of the best looking rangefinders ever produced. All i know is that it works and feels great to use.
They’re were originally made as a base/basic model, but in reality were one of the last truly “bulletproof” cameras produced by Canon, so many are still working as well today as they were over 50 years ago.
Theres not too much to the camera. No light meter, so theres no electrical issues. No fancy features that cause problems. Just a simple, clean looking camera, that works as good as it looks with a smooth film advance, and a satisfying shutter sound. The viewfinder is quite big and very bright with nice clear framelines (maybe mine has been CLA’s recently?).
Why use a camera with no light meter and no features that make life easier? Well, its fun.
Below is a photo of mine with a Jupiter 8 attached i had lying around. The 50mm framelines are particularly well placed in the VF, so i think a 50mm lens will live on the Canon now.
I got this camera for a steal of a price, but they regularly sell for around $100-$150, and at that price i still think they’re great value. If you want a super reliable camera, stripped back on fancy features that will take some of the greatest lenses ever created (Leica Thread Mount), then i cant think of any camera more suitable than the Canon “Populaire”.

Whats dangerous??
Well, the fact that im borrowing a Mamiya RB67 from a friend and i might get attached to medium format photography…. Thats whats dangerous.
Its big and heavy and damn ugly, but when you look through that viewfinder its bloody terrific. They you ofcourse have the 120 film itself which i’ve always been wanting to try out. Nothing comes close to the quality of enlargements and fine detail from medium and large format film.
I dont know why im letting myself try this camera out. Its actually pretty stupid. I’ve been interested in the Pentax 67 for a while now, and i need another reason to spend more money like i need a hole in the head (ie. photography has already sucked enough money out of me).
so anyway, this is the camera. An RB67 “Pro-s” made between 1974-1990. It has the 120 film back, 2 lenses; 90mm f/3.8 and a 150mm f/4. Oh yeah, and no metered prism on this baby (an expensive optional extra).
I’ll give it a go in a couple of weeks. I have about 10 rolls of cheap 120 film i’ll try and burn though, then develop along side my regular 35mm film. Hopefully i get some half decent results.

Well after seeing Tim’s test on noise reduction software, i thought i’d try one out myself. I’d never really compared different NR(noise reduction) processes before, instead i’d just basically given up high iso photography. I have to say, after mucking around with the software a little bit, im not so worried about using high iso settings on the DSLR anymore. I was quite impressed.
I only had 3 methods of NR which included DPP (Digital Photo Professional), Noise ninja, and “Camera RAW” with photoshop. I tried all on the same photo which i’ve taken a 100% crop sample of. I tried to include a mix of textures in the sample.
View the image below at it’s largest size and you immediately you notice each process produced quite different results.
The original photo was taken indoors with dim light. The digital noise isnt that bad really, i have other photos that are worse, but i chose this as it had several different textures and is common of the iso noise i get.
Camera RAW seemed to keep the most “faithful” colours, but blurred pretty much everything. Some detail was lost particularly in the edges, which gave an overall soft look to the photo. It seemed to get rid of both noise and grain which are two different things really. By getting rid of some grain it lost a bit of sharpness and detail.
DPP was a little less full on when it came to removing the grain. It still has quite a bit which helps keep some overall sharpness. To my eyes it has a nicer contrast and colour too. I’d never used DPP before, but it looks to be quite effective.
Noise Ninja was again different. I downloaded the 400D (Rebel XTi) NR profile from the manufacturer website and gave it a go. It appears to be bit of a mixed bag. I like how it’s kept some edge sharpness, more than the other programs, but it makes the skin look like plastic. Some people might like that as bit of an airbrushed skin shortcut, but its not to my tastes. The colour has again changed from the original, probably the most drastic out of all. It was also introduced some of its own fragments to the image which look a little messy, this might be treatable in the setting panel which i didnt play around with (i just used standard setting for all).

After looking at the 3 noise reduction programs, i have to say i quite like them all in one way or another.
I’d never used DPP before, but i liked how it treated the image. It still has some grain, but removes most of the digital noise which is what i want most. It had nice contrast i thought, and the colours looked fine too. The only downside is that theres not many options for individual settings. So fine tuning is pretty much out of the question. (It almost seems as though it was bit of an after thought with the DPP software, but thats another story).
Noise ninja seems very powerful with a large range of fine tuning options. I think once i play around with it i’ll be able to reduce the plastic skin look. The colours looked quite different from the original too, but thats probably another thing that can be fixed also. The program seems to need a bit of fine tuning which is to be expected i guess. But the whole idea is to minimise hours infront of the computer, if i have to play around with NN each time i use it, i’ll probably lose interest. Thats just a personal thing though.
Then theres Camera RAW which seems fine, but would probably be my last choice. It just seems to give bit of an overall blur to the image, which isnt all that useful.

I guess it all comes down to personal preference. If i can get Noise Ninja sorted out, i’ll use that the most. Otherwise i’ll go with DPP and its simplicity.

Well, the other week i was made an offer i couldnt refuse. The offer was to buy another Olympus SP, but this time in Silver, for a very reasonable price. Actually, an extremely reasonable price. I wasnt in the market for another camera, let alone another SP, but somehow i convinced myself i should get another one. =/
The SP on offer came with its original case and manual, but the best bit was that it had just undergone a CLA, plus it had a modification that allows it to take modern voltage batteries without any stuffing around. These two things alone would of cost more than what i ended up buying the camera for, so i was pretty pleased. I was about to send my black SP in for a CLA anyway, so this saved me the hassle, plus i can now leave it at home and not worry about scratching the thing (well thats how i justified the purchase). The silver one is now my user, eventhough it is cosmetically and functionally flawless. (I would of been happy wich a scratched up user, but who am i to complain?)
So anyway, heres a quick picture of them together below :

This is my other toy, another Olympus but this time the OM2n model. The one i have is in near perfect condition, with hardly any wear on the body at all. I doubt it has been used much in its life time so far, but that’s about to change!
Eventhough it was in such good condition, the batteries and light seals needed to be replaced. So i ordered some new silver oxide batteries (no the alkaline type), and then started my search for some new light seals. I stumbled on the kits made by Jon Goodman and ordered one after reading so many good reports. The light seal kit came today, so i really wanted to get started on it. This is what i did :

Below you will see a couple of pics of the old light seals. They have deteriorated quite a bit over time, and have just turned into black sticky muck basically.

The first step was to remove the remaining old seals. This was done using solvent and this nifty little bamboo stick that came with the light seal kit. It didn’t come out as easy as i thought, and took quite alot of time to scrape it all out. Next time i’ll use a more powerful solvent, the only one i had was some crappy biodegradable/environmentally friendly variety. Which just means its weak shit.

Next, i had to put the new foam light seals in. First i put in new rail slot on the back. Then a nice new fabric hinge seal. Both were pretty simple to do.

After that i had to move onto the hard bit, the mirror damper. This was actually really tricky for a couple of reasons. First of all, the area is physically quite hard to get to, and it was hard to get any light in there to see what you were doing (i should of done it during the day with some natural light). The other difficult part was actually cutting the foam to size. Adhesive backed foam cut at 2mm wide doesn’t want to keep its shape, and its easy to not get a bad cut. Using a Stanley Knife i managed to get it first go, but there has to be a better way of doing it. Below you can see one of the two “L” shaped pieces of foam i had to cut. It looks alot easier than it was!

After the mirror damper i was finished, and now have a camera with fresh light seals. The next step is the real fun bit, taking photos. I’ll find out if my light seals work, haha.