Talk:Olympus OM system

Jump to: navigation, search
This is the discussion page for Olympus OM system. Click here to start a new topic.

Discussion pages are for discussing improvements to the article itself, not for discussions about the subject of the article.


We read: "The OM system was designed by the legendary camera designer Yoshihisa Maitani."

Maitani is indeed a famous designer, and deserves credit. But I'm puzzled by the way that most references to him in this encyclopedia preface him with "famous". If he's the famous Maitani, then since Olympus, Nikon, Canon, Pentax, etc are more famous than he is, shouldn't they too be prefaced with "famous"?

"Legendary" strikes me as way over the top. Or have some legends grown up around him? -- Hoary 22:48, 18 May 2006 (EDT)

You are right to tone down the articles.
However it is fair to recognize that Maitani has acquired a notoriety that most other camera designers don't have. Just like Barnack, many people know his name while this was never the name of a company or a camera model. In contrast, there are many important cameras whose designer has fallen into oblivion. For example, I would be unable to tell the name of the designer of the Nikon F or Exakta or Spotmatic, while there is a whole website called maitani_fan.
As for the legends, I have read in a book titled 往年のオリンパスカメラ図鑑 that some people stop him in the street and ask him to sign the top plate of their Pen or OM camera, and that the company offered him a diamond-point pen for that purpose. It is a fact that Olympus and Maitani himself have pushed the image of a "genius engineer" (in the same book it is called nothing less than 天才技術者). There are many interviews of Maitani published in various places, and most of them establish a comparison between the Olympus Pen, XA and OM small size models and the Leica screw models, in a tone that implicitly presents Maitani as Barnack's spiritual son.
I think that we must at least tell something about this special popularity, presented in a neutral tone. The best place to put this is probably the page about him. --Rebollo fr 07:47, 19 May 2006 (EDT)


Hi there. I am a bit crap at this wiki mark-up language; can somebody draw up this table in a nice way; like on the Wikipedia OM page, but in this order?

Or... I can just try and make it look nicer I guess... :(

(archived here for anyone interested) Timmy Toucan 12/12/06

The short answer is that the Wikipedia timeline is released under GFDL and theoretically you can copy it and paste it here provided you cite the provenance.
Of course it would be better to re-build it from scratch. You will find a starting point in the Category:Timeline templates. (All these timelines are inspired by Wikipedia's Template: Early Ferrari vehicles.)
--Rebollo fr 19:33, 12 December 2006 (EST)

Alright then... many hits of 'preview' later... Ta-Daaaa!!! (Still a work in progress, hence it being here)-Timmy Toucan 14/12/06
I have removed the "Timeline templates" category to avoid this talk page being categorized there. You can work directly on the page Template: Olympus OM timeline or Template: Olympus OM body timeline (or whatever title you feel appropriate). The template won't appear to the average reader until you insert it in the articles.
Wouldn't it make sense to separate the OM-1 and 2 from the OM-1n and 2n? I also prefer the version where the models are not cut by the decennial bars, but of course this is extremely subjective and unimportant. --Rebollo fr 06:00, 14 December 2006 (EST)
Relocated to its own template page at Template: Olympus OM timeline for work... I too visually prefer the non- decade demarcated version, but think it is actually easier to read this way.
I don't have the dates handy for all the various OM-1 and -2n's... but if I get them I will add them too.-Timmy Toucan 15/12/06
The OM-1N and OM-2N were both released in 1979. --Rebollo fr 06:29, 16 April 2007 (EDT)


Anyone else think this page is a bit... empty? Couldn't/Shouldn't we merge the "Olympus OM accessories" page into this one under the System header? -Timmy Toucan 16/04/07

I agree. That page exists for a long, long time and I don't know what to do with it. Maybe we might also rename it "Olympus OM system". --Rebollo fr 06:30, 16 April 2007 (EDT)
Okay... I have no idea how to merge one page into another (you rename pages by using the move tab, correct?). Can you give me a clue as to how best to do this?
Also, is there a way to easily find all pages that link to the 'OM Accessories' page? -Timmy Toucan 16/04/07
To move pages, you have the "move" tab indeed.
There is no special tool to merge, you have to cut and paste the contents of "Olympus OM accessories" into this one, and to transform the former into a redirect by leaving "#redirect [[Olympus OM system]]" as sole content. It is good to describe what you did in the edit summary, so it would be possible to trace the change history.
There is a "What links here" tool on the left of the pages, below the search box, that will help you find the linking pages. --Rebollo fr 07:04, 16 April 2007 (EDT)
Done and done! Thanks for your help (again). But... Can I make it automatically take you to the new page, instead of showing me that 'redirect' screen? (not that it really matters cos I've killed all article links anyway). -Timmy Toucan 16/04/07


I would rather have "Olympus OM system" for capitalization, without the capital letter (imitating the Wikipedia rules). --Rebollo fr 07:24, 16 April 2007 (EDT)

Your wish is my command &c. -Timmy Toucan 16/04/07

Type 1-8 finder screen

I read that the 1-8 finder screen is only compatible with super-telephoto lenses and astronomical telescopes. I also read this info elsewhere, maybe in the Olympus charts. I have a 1-8 screen and I tried it on an OM body: it is perfectly possible to focus a 50mm lens and I have no reason to think that the pictures would be out of focus. So why is this reputed not to work? --Rebollo fr 10:24, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

Uh... Dunno. Olympus themselves say it doesn't work on their compatibility charts, but if it does I can only guess it's a marketing ploy or something...? Timmy Toucan 18:46, 28 April 2007 (EDT)