Olympus’s decision to sell off its photographic division brings to an end more than 80 years of camera making.
The decision was made public on Wednesday (24 June), as Olympus pivots towards its medical devices business. It had sold the camera division to Japan Industrial Partners (JIP), the same investment firm which bought Sony’s Vaio PC business in 2014.
While digital photographers will know the firm from the OM-D and Pen digital mirrorless models, Olympus’s pedigree is built on a line of classic cameras in the latter half of the 20th Century. It is the end of 84 years of camera making at Olympus.
Olympus didn’t make luxury rangefinders like Leica, nor did its cameras capture conflict like Nikon’s F-series SLRs. Much like Pentax, Olympus’s cameras were aimed at enthusiasts rather than professionals – no copy of the National Geographic was complete in the 1970s was complete without an ad for an Olympus OM-series SLR in it. But the OM line certainly felt pretty professional, with superlative lenses and a dizzying amount of accessories.
You might also like:
- Ten classic East German cameras
- Five cheap but capable film compacts
- Soviet camera posts on Kosmo Foto
Olympus’s classics – many of them made by the genius designer Yoshihasa Maitani – spanned half-frame cameras to no-nonsense rangefinders, SLRS to perfectly pocketable compact cameras. As Olympus leaves the camera-making business, Kosmo Foto looks back at 10 classic film cameras which carried its name.
Olympus Flex (1952)
Oddly, for a camera maker renowned for its diminutive designs, one of Olympus’s early successes was a Rolleiflex-rivalling medium format SLR. The Olympus Flex, one of a raft of twin-lens reflex cameras to come from Japan in the 1950s, built on the reputation of the Olympus Six, a series of increasingly more impressive 6×6 folding cameras. The Flex – the first TLR Olympus produced – was no cheap-as-chips stopgap. At its centre was a bright and sharp Zuiko 75/2.8 lens, and a shutter which speeds as fast 1/400.
Review and some fantastic example images on Rangefinder Chronicles
Olympus Pen F (1963)
Medium format might have been de rigueur in the mid-1950s, but Olympus could see which way the wind was blowing. In 1959, they released the first of the Pen half-frame viewfinder cameras, a beautiful example of 1950s camera design. By the 1950s, 35mm film was becoming more popular and capable, but was still somewhat expensive, with many camera designers deciding to eke out the rolls by doubling the number of pictures you could take on each roll. This meant the camera produced an 18×24 mm size (meaning that if you put in a 36-frame roll you would end up with 72 pictures.
The ultimate iteration of the Pen family was the F, essentially a scaled-down SLR in a beautifully minimalist body, with a suite of fantastic Zuiko lenses. The Pen F was not only a thoroughbred amongst half-frames, it was also a beautiful object, showing the nascent genius of its designer, Yoshihasa Maitani.
Review on Shoot It With Film
Olympus Trip 35 (1967)
The Kodak Brownie of the Cold War. As jet airliners made international travel quicker and cheaper, overseas holidays became the preserve of the working classes instead of the higher-ups. Olympus built a camera designed to be idiot proof: no annoying manual to read, just choose a distance setting, set the camera on “A” for automatic, and if the light wasn’t good enough for it take a picture, a bold red flag would pop up in the viewfinder. The Trip 35’s giant selenium cell meter around the lens also meant no wasted holiday time bellowing in broken English for batteries instead of enjoying sun, sand and sangria.
The Trip wasn’t just a success, it was a sensation; millions of them were made and production didn’t end until 1984. The Trip 35 was an example of Olympus’s genius, creating a camera perfectly suited to an emerging market.
Review on Kosmo Foto
Olympus 35SP (1969)
Just because Olympus’s rangefinders don’t come with a Leica price tag doesn’t mean they weren’t desirable in their day. Well regarded even today, the Olympus 35SP matched a seven-element 42/1.7 lens with a centre-weighted or spot meter, depending on what’s needed. The 35SP also boasted an auto-exposure system, an exposure lock with a half-press of the shutter button, and a “Flashmatic” system which helped choose the right flash settings. It put all of this in a clean, classic, uncluttered body which would influence the following decade of Olympus rangefinder innovation.
Olympus 35SP profile by Ken Rockwell
Review on EMULSIVE
Olympus 35RC (1970)
AKA “The Poor Man’s Leica”. The 35RC is one of the the smallest rangefinders built with an auto-exposure system – just click the aperture collar to “A” and choose a shutter speed, and the camera chooses the right shutter. Tiny but with some reassuring heft, the 35RC has a 42/2.8 lens and a handful of street-shooter’s shutter speeds. This was the perfect camera for people who wanted a touch of helpful automation, a cracking lens and little else. Should the light be too low, the 35RC doesn’t let you take the shot, a handy little hangover from the Trip 35.
Profile by Ken Rockwell
Review on 35mmc
Olympus FTL (1971)
Before the OM series, Olympus dipped its toes in the full-frame SLR market with the FTL, the only Olympus camera made for the M42 lens mount. Coming between the Pen F and the OM-1, the FTL was only produced for a matter of months in 1971 and 72 before making way for the Olympus OM series. Its place in Olympus’s pantheon seems to be mostly forgotten today, probably partly because it used the ubiquitous M42 mount and was bigger and less stylish than Maitani’s OM-1. The FTL, however, came with a cracking set of Zuiko M42 lenses and is a fantastic, no-frills 70s SLR.
Profile on Biofos.com
Olympus OM-2 (1975)
The Olympus OM-1 introduced the famous OM marque in 1973, but arguably it was the OM-2 which catapulted this family into the realms of timeless classic. Where the OM-1 was an all-manual SLR, the OM-2 could be used both fully manual or aperture priority.
Small and perfectly laid out, the OM-2 features one of the brightest finders ever found on a film SLR, plus incredibly accurate metering measured from the film plane itself – the first camera in the world to feature this witchcraft. The OM-2 ran with its predecessor’s modular system, with every accessory interchangeable without the need for modification. Some professionals sniffed at the OM-2 because it was deemed to be too small and light to be a serious camera, but more fool them.
Review by Simon Hawketts
Review on Anatomy Films
Olympus XA (1979)
Inspired by designer Yoshihisa Matani finding himself without a camera while enjoying a hot pool in the spa town of Suwa – and while he was soaking a truck parked just outside the spa burst into flames. Maitani later recounted it was a once-in-a-lifetime moment, and he didn’t have a camera to capture it. “Even if your camera can capture shots of outer space or bacteria, it’s useless if you don’t have it with you. I was determined to make a camera that people could carry with them everywhere,” he later told a seminar in Japan in 2005. He decided to build a proper cameras that could be slipped into the smallest pocket. The XA was that camera.
A design classic far beyond the world of cameras, the XA is a masterpiece of miniaturisation, a rangefinder that can be fitted in the palm of the hand, but which comes with a superbly sharp lens and aperture-priority auto exposure. The sliding clamshell door, which protect the lens and stops the shutter button being activated in your pocket, was another masterful detail that would influence another generation of cameras.
Review on Kosmo Foto
Review on Photojottings
Olympus OM-4 (1983)
Even as DSLRs began their dominance of 21st Century photography, Olympus was still making the ultimate OM SLR,; the OM-4 was only discontinued in 2002. The camera looked just like the OM-1 and OM-2, but its metering was even more advanced, a multi-spot meter which would take up to eight different readings and average them. In 1987, the OM-4Ti added strong titanium body plates and and improved weatherproofing. Of Olympus’s SLRs, it’s the closest thing they made to take on the high-spec manual-focus SLRS made by Nikon and Canon.
Review by Alex Luyckx
Olympus Mju-II (1997)
Millions of these compacts were made in the late 1990s and early 2000s, but today they fetch upwards of £200 each – why? Well, thank Mr Maitani once again. His last major project at Olympus before retirement, the Mju (or Stylus Epic in the US) brought an autofocus brain into a compact plastic clamshell body not a million miles away from the XA. Boasting a sharp 35/2.8 Zuiko lens, and an autofocus with 100 different steps for more accurate focusing, the Mju-II was supposedly superseded by following models with ever more ambitious zoom lenses. Sometimes, less is definitely more.
Review on Kosmo Foto
Review on Vogelius
What’s your favourite Olympus film camera? Let us know by leaving a comment.
Support Kosmo Foto
Keep Kosmo Foto free to read by subscribing on Patreon for as little as $1 month, or make a one-off payment via Ko-Fi. All your donations really help.
I bought a XA2 in 1981 specifically to use when I was in the army and recovered the money from a small profit on the sale of copies to my buddies then. Great camera, but now the clamshell is stuck
The first SLR I owned was an OM1, while at university in the late seventies. Before that, I had used my Dads Spotmatic; the difference in size was astounding! Continued with the OM system through life, until the collapse in value of film gear when digital came in allowed a bit of a splurge…… Now I have OM1’s, OM2’s and an OM4,not to mention an OM10, Zuiko lenses 24mm to 300mm and a cabinet full of motordrives and flash stuff. It’s my main photography gear. Also a couple of rangefinders and the obligatory Trip. Which is favourite? Not sure that… Read more »
I’d dispute the notion that Olympus cameras were not used in war zones or aimed at professionals. Don McCullin used them in Vietnam in the 1970s (and for the next 30+ years), largely because of their small size and light weight. Also Jane Bown is famous for using the OM1 for her photojournalism and celebrity portraits–that’s just off the top of my head. I have two OM2n bodies, which are lovely to use.
Sure – I’m a big fan of Jane Bown and know she shot the OM-1. I still think the pros definitely were more likely to shoot Leica/Canon/Nikon however. Out of all the newspaper photographers I worked with, I only know one who shot Olympus.
Was she/he the one who didn’t have a bad back? They’ve always been a small player in the West (apart from the Trip, which was around the neck of every tourist in the late 1970s). I use Olympus cameras professionally now, and I think in the digital age there is a certain type of enthusiast who sees the small size off-putting. I’ve had a few comments by people (men; let’s be frank) at events I’ve been shooting explaining that I wouldn’t get a good photograph from that distance using “a wide lens like that”, when in fact it was… Read more »
I was only tlking about the film days – I’m sure there are a lot of people shooting the new OMs professionally, especially wedding and travel photographers. That observation is no slight against the Olympus film SLRs – I have an OM-2, 10 and 20, and I must admit I think I’m looking to add an OM-4.
Yes, I realise, just noting that they’ve continued the small size USP into the digital age. I want an OM4 too.
Only get an OM4Ti to be sure you have the low OFF mode current drain chip in the camera.
Yes I have one, brilliant; had an OM4 which Levinson (Olympus agent Australia 70’s) upgraded without charge as part of a factory program. The original OM-4’s would deplete a battery within three weeks despite being switched off.
Apart from the light metering and (other OMs incompatible) fresnel focusing screen, I actually prefer the OM-2N because it’s viewfinder is is more clear. OM4/Ti has more elements and internal reflections.
Is that supposed to be de rigueur?
It is indeed – my high school French teacher will be appalled. Thanks for the spot!
In the seventies, United Press International equipped it’s staffers with OM gear. Also, one of the most famous Nat Geo covers was shot with an OM. Bruce Dale mounted two cameras on the tail of an airliner with 250 exposure backs (and protective boxes). Olympus had a lot of gear aimed at pros, like 250 backs, motor drives, and long lenses that others did not have. I once shot with a 250mm f2 and 350mm f 2.8 in the nineties.
Smallest Olympus 35 series is not 35 RC, but 35 EC2 (which has auto exposure as well, but only zone focusing). RC is considered medium sized…, as it still retained manual control. I attended one exhibition at San Francisco Museum of Modern Art (SFMOMA) and one of the artists used 35 RC and it was showcased in a glass cabinet. I was like, I have that camera! OM-4T is not just an OM-4 with Titanium plates. OM-4T introduced the capability to use F280 flash to allow flash synch at all shutter speeds (in OM-4T’s case, flash synch up to 1/2000″).… Read more »
Oh, and don’t forget the futuristic Olympus O-Product and the less famous Olympus Ecru.
I know it is said too often, but if they’d just make an OM-D that took those lenses!
There is an adapter, but I hear what your saying. I can imagine a world where an Olympus OM-D full frame sensor camera that uses the OM Zuiko lenses not only exists, but is a best seller too. Why did they have to go micro 4/3rds? Don’t get me wrong, the MFT OM-D cameras are excellent and filled with great tech, but in low light they suck.
Worth mentioning the off-the-film-plane real-time flash metering also in the OM2. And their macro stuff was outstanding. I won the BBC Wildlife Magazine Wildlife Photographer of the Year competition in 1982, I think the only time that competition has been won by OLY stuff. And, of course, remember David Bailey….
I wanted an OM-1 since I was a kid growing up in the 70’s. the “David Bailey, who’s he?” adverts were never off the telly and it left a lasting impression on me. I eventually got my hands on an OM-1 in 2019 which proves childhood dreams can come true, they just take a while. My Olympus line up includes an OM-2 that does everything the amatuer photographer should ever need in an auto exposure SLR and a 35RC which is an incredible camera for it’s time. So small it fits right in your pocket and, with a lens capable… Read more »
Good article! I was (am) a Canon guy, buying my first SLR in 1983 (Canon AE-1P), and then later adding an A-1, EOS 10s, EOS Elan and EOS 3. In the last several years I have become infatuated with the Olympus OM series and now own an OM-1md, OM-2n, and OM-2S. As I have gotten older less equipment weight is greatly appreciated. I also own an XA, XA2 and XA3. While the OM-2S is often touted as the superior camera I prefer the OM-2n and OM-1. I like the all mechanical aspect of the OM-1 and the OFF switch on… Read more »
I am in love with the OM-2n, but use the OM-1 as my second camera. When I walk out the door for anything else I grab the XA, or if lazy XA3.
I have two OM1’s in my collection. Had an OM-2 but gave it to my son’s friend for her birthday as I figured she needed an auto exposure mode more than I did. Like Jim Graves, I wanted an OM-1 after my schoolmate bought one but I had to make do with my old FTB. Just wish there were more lenses on the used market at Canon and Nikon prices. Might sound odd but I use the OM-1 when I dress up. it’s kind of like putting on jewelry.
I’d remove the OlympusFlex and FTL cameras and add the OM1N. The OlympusFlex was not popular; they were late to the TLR game and were just following Rollei and Yashica. It was a “me-too” camera; no real innovation or staying power. The FTL was not a real commitment to SLRs, but a “me-too” camera. OM1 was their first serious SLR; it launched the mighty OM System. In a similar manner, I might add the first good Micro Four Thirds camera that launched that system, which is still much-loved today. OM4 was a cracking good camera. I had one back in… Read more »
I’m surprised the pen ee is not included in your article.