I have been taking photographs for over thirty years, primarily as a means of creative expression and personal documentation. I got my start covering events for my high school paper, but did so using borrowed equipment. It wasn't until my junior year in college that I was able to save up and buy my own camera, a beat up second hand OM-1n, complete with power winder (remember those?) and a trio of Zuiko lenses: a 50mm F1.4, a 24mm F2.8 and a 100-200 F5. The kit was supposedly put up for consignment in one of the specialty second-hand camera stores in Manila by a Swiss photojournalist to help pay for a severe illness. It thus made me slightly guilty to buy the equipment at such a fire sale price, but the OM-1 had been the camera of my dreams for a long time: it was the only pro-level camera used by the National Geographic photographers (whom I idolized) that I could hold comfortably in my quite small hands. It was my main camera for more than 20 years, even after I started dabbling in digital photography. And it was because of my loyalty to Olympus that I bough an E-series 4/3 camera when I made the jump to the world of DSLRs back in the mid-2000s.
But despite my strong attachment to my OM-1, there were two cameras from my early days of photography that really left a very strong imprint, and helped to define my definition of the "ideal" camera. The first was the Olympus Pen-F, which I first used in high school to take photos for the program of a school play. The camera was owned by someone in the cast, who lent it to me to do the shoot. I really liked the way it was solidly built despite its small size, its logical, mechanical controls, and the fact that it shot half-frame 35mm images, allowing me to get more shots per (expensive) roll of film. The second camera was the Leica M3, which I got to use in college. It belonged to the dad of one of my college class mates, who no longer used it. I recall borrowing the M3 for two weeks or so, and used it to take very personal, reflective photos around my grandparents' house a few months after they had both finally passed away. I vividly recall most of the photos I took that day---I had one roll of Black and White film, and took my time, shooting very deliberately. To this day, I judge my photos by the memory of the very simple, well-composed, minimalist photos I took that day. In many ways, the OM-1 was a synthesis of both those great cameras, which is another reason I bought one when I had the chance. I thought that would be that.
Within a few years after immigrating to the States, however, and with the growing popularity of the then-new fangled interwebs garage sale called eBay, I started trolling around for used Pen Fs, and later on, when I had saved up more, a Leica M3. I eventually found great working models of both, and looked forward to shooting with them. But, life, the cost of film, and the new fangled digital technology happened, and the Pen F and M3 were relegated to my display shelf most of the time.
Fast forward to 2010; I was getting tired of lugging my Olympus DSLR and its lenses around, and wished I could find a digital back for my OM-1n and my M3. As I trolled around the internet, I discovered that the new Olympus E-P1 "digital Pen" which I had pooh-poohed shortly after it launched as nothing more than a glorified point-and-shoot (and that would never measure up to the Pen F it tried to emulate) actually took adapters so one could use legacy manual lenses, including the Olympus and Leica lenses I already owned. Of course, I had already been using some of my OM-1 lenses on my E-500, but I found the DSLR still too big for everyday shooting. I took the plunge into M43 when I found a refurbished E-P1 with the kit zoom, and threw in a Leica M and Olympus OM adapter. The old lenses came out of storage and I was very pleased. A year later, I sold off all my Olympus 4/3 equipment and shifted completely to micro 4/3. Again, I thought that would be that.
But I knew part of me still wished I could have a digital version of the M3. They existed in the form of the M8, and then, the M9, but I could never justify shelling out the cost of a second hand car to buy a manual focus digital camera body and lens. So, when Fuji launched the X100 with much fanfare, it caught my eye, not only for its retro, rangefinder-style looks, but also because it had full analog shutter speed and aperture controls, just like the M3, the OM-1 and the Pen-F. I held off from buying for a long time, happily shooting with my digital Pens, but when one went up for sale at 2/3 the original price, I decided to check it out. The familiarity of the control dials, the ability to switch between an EVF and an RF-like optical finder with frame lines, but with the added bonus of key information overlaid, made me an instant convert---the better IQ files (in my opinion), were an added bonus. As great as the digital Pens were, I found out I had been subconsciously wishing for those manually-set control dials for shutter speeds and apertures. It was a short hop over from there to the X-Pro 1, which had the added bonus of interchangeable lenses, plus adapters for all my old lenses, just like the Pens.
In the last month, I have sold off almost every single piece of m43 kit I owned and converted to the X-series. I do not intend to buy any other lens for the X-Pro ; I am very pleased with the exceptional 35mm F1.4 that came with the body I bought second hand, and, with a new diopter lens in place and Firmware 2.0 installed, I am having a blast shooting with the X-Pro 1 and my legacy lenses. It feels like the best of the Pen-F, M3 and OM-1 have come together, digitally, in the X-Pro1 and the X-100, and I have a feeling of contentment that I have not had in very long while.
Recent photos taken with both the X-Pro 1 and the X-100.
No comments:
Post a Comment