Which camera do I sell and which do I keep?

October 6, 2010 2:04 AM

Which camera do I sell and which do I keep? Film cameras: Olympus OM-1 with Zuiko auto-s f1.4 50mm and Canon AE-1 35 mm.

1) I'd like to keep one of the cameras, but am not sure which will be more relevant or less obsolete in the years to come: the 35 or 55 mm.

2) As for the one I don't keep, what's a fair price to sell it for? I've done a search for google and the range is pretty wide.

Here are some pics:
http://orangecounty.craigslist.org/pho/1986206864.html
http://losangeles.craigslist.org/wst/pho/1986208642.html

Thank you to everyone who offered his or her expertise to my first question:
http://ask.metafilter.com/163800/What-should-I-do-with-these-vintage-motion-and-still-film-cameras

posted by bestillme to media & arts (15 answers total)

Personally, I believe 35mm to be the perfect focal length. I'm a huge street photography fan and the vast majority of my favourite photographers used 35mm or there abouts.
posted by Hates_ at 2:16 AM on October 6, 2010

The OM-1 is a gorgeous camera, so small, light and well engineered. Olympus's Zuiko lenses are some of the finest ever made, and the 50 1.4 is one of the best of those.

The Canon AE-1 is a decent 35mm SLR, but not quite as special. The Canon FD 50 1.4 is a very good lens, though I'd pick the Olympus lens over it any day.

One thing to note is that while you can't use the Canon FD lenses on any modern SLR or DSLR, you can happily mount Olmpus OM lenses on most modern DSLRs with a cheap adaptor. This ironically includes Canon cameras made since 1990.

For price searches, I like to do a completed listings search on eBay.

So yeah. If you intend to use it, keep the OM-1. If you don't, sell it (to me!)
posted by Magnakai at 2:58 AM on October 6, 2010

I have no emotional attachment to any of the many film cameras I owned for many years, but I've always liked the Oly OM series for their diminutive, jewel-like quality.

So, if you're going to keep one of them, I'd vote the for the OM-1.
posted by imjustsaying at 3:07 AM on October 6, 2010

Another vote for the OM-1. I have that same Zuiko 50 and wouldn't trade it for anything.
posted by TrialByMedia at 3:48 AM on October 6, 2010

OM-1 as well. This is a classic and good quality set-up.
posted by carter at 5:00 AM on October 6, 2010

I have an om-1 and i loved using it. But you cant get the batteries for it anymore. That's something to take into account. You can adapt some hearing aid batteries, but they are not an exact replacement. The batteries only run the meter. The camera can be used without them.
posted by DarkForest at 5:48 AM on October 6, 2010

Thank you everyone for your votes and reasons why. Very helpful as my camera knowledge is limited.

Oops, just realized that both cameras are 50mm-- most of you probably caught that in the photos.
The Canon lens is an FD 50mm 1:14 S.S.C.

Magnakai, thanks for the price search suggestion on ebay and for letting me know about the versatility of the Olympus lens. You've made a convincing case for the Olympus, but if I do decide to sell, will be sure to let you know. :)

Just out of curiosity, how much would you guys and gals pay for the Canon?

Thanks again!
posted by bestillme at 6:06 AM on October 6, 2010

DarkForest, thanks for letting me know. Didn't even think to consider the batteries. Very good point.
posted by bestillme at 6:08 AM on October 6, 2010

50mm lens. I love[ed] my OM1
posted by the noob at 6:19 AM on October 6, 2010

Keep the Olympus. Canon AE-1s are a dime a dozen, and not particularly interesting cameras. If you want another AE-1 in the future, it will be cheap and easy to get. A nice vintage Olympus will be much harder to find.
posted by b1tr0t at 6:33 AM on October 6, 2010

> But you can't get the batteries for it any more.

There are options. Not mentioned in the link is the mercury-substitute battery I got for my ancient Lunasix; don't remember the brand, but it's a standard Duracell/Varta/Energizer packaged as a PX625 including voltage control resistors. Cheap, and has lasted for years.
posted by scruss at 6:54 AM on October 6, 2010

Keep the Olympus. I always shoot Canon but the AE-1 is a lesser camera than the OM-1. The Canon won't get much money. Price it to sell at $50 or less.
posted by JJ86 at 8:27 AM on October 6, 2010

bestillme, both cameras are 35mm, not 50mm. The "size" of the camera is based on the film width, not on the lens size, as most of that era's SLRs have a series of interchangeable lenses available with different focal lengths , which in turn translates into wider or narrower fields of vision.

Nthing the OM-1. The Canon is a fine serviceable camera, but if you are only keeping one, the one you will miss later on and have a harder time replacing is the Oly. As others have noted, the Canon was ubiquitous and can be had for little money now.
posted by beelzbubba at 8:37 AM on October 6, 2010

Scruss - thanks for the options. you've saved me an hour in front of the computer, in my car, and scratching my head. really appreciate the info.

JJ86 - thanks for the price point. had a hard time narrowing the range I saw on the internet given that I didn't know how to account for the slight variations in what was for sale: f1:14 vs. f1:18, lenses, cases, winders, etc. thanks!

beelzbubba - ahh. gotcha. that explains why I saw the Canon as a 35mm online. thanks for taking the time to explain that.

Thanks everyone. You've made my decision a no brainer. You're a very generous bunch :)
posted by bestillme at 11:09 AM on October 6, 2010

I love my fast FD lenses, but the OM stuff is definitely more "future-proof", as Magnakai and others have mentioned.
posted by tapesonthefloor at 4:01 PM on October 6, 2010