Fastest subscribe I’ve ever done. The pacing and informations of your vids feels very adequate to me. That combined with the jazz music is just perfect. Love it man!
The f stop guide numbers seem to have been added to assist the rather unusual metering system in the Ft I understand the ring can be rotated to have the f numbers on the top, my 35mm f1.8 only has the f values. I have the F. I find using a meter (or a phone app ) adds to the experience of using film
This is probably my favorite looking camera of all time, I just love it so much. I currently only own the original Pen which isn't as pleasing to look at to me but still a great camera.
Lenses with ("aperture") numbers 1-6 (or 1-7) are later versions made for the Pen FT. The numbers correlate with the built-in, but not synchronized light meter. You need to read the number shown on the scale on the left of the viewfinder and then set the aperture to the number on the lens. Quite weird, but once you get used to it, it works fine without taking your eyes off the viewfinder. All you have to do is count to the disered number by clicking the aperture ring from 1 to the number you want, and you're done. As described, to better use these lenses with the Pen-F (or FV), you can rotate the aperture ring 180 degrees to set the usual f-numbers.
There's another half frame, interchangeable lens, slr camera, the Konica Autoreflex which could also be set to shoot in full frame. It's one of the best underrated camera of all times...
This is a gorgeous camera, superior in so many ways to the Olympus Pen F, not only that but you can switch back and forth between full frame and 1/2 frame. Unlike the Pen F, you can actually focus the image correctly, where you can only guess with Pen F.
I found the Konica Autorex bigger and heavier than I like and the shutter release button had a lot of travel. The images were really good and it’s fine to use. I think the 57mm f1.4 lens is ace. It’s great to have (effectively) a choice of two focal lengths for portraits. The Konica Eye looks like an interesting half-frame camera I’d like to try.
I love the look and feel of my Pen FT ... since I loved DISC film, I am not concerned about grain from a small format!!! I dig half frame stuff, great for Diptychs!!!
There are couple other purely half frame cameras that aren't zone focus and have interchangable lens. But they are extremely rare and extremely expensive. The Robot Royal 18 and the Leica 72. Both rangefinders.
I’d thought about buying one of these just to have a candid camera always next to me . But in those situations you’d also like to have a very low light camera . A 40mm f/1.2 Voigtlander on a 35mm M mount rangefinder maybe. I’m also looking at the Leica M5 . Of course not as portable. The light meter is really handy for those fast candid movements that usually happen in dimmer lighting. I was thinking HP5 shot at 800 iso
Thanks for sharing, this is another retro camera on my radar. I currently have the Olympus Pen EE half frame camera. I've added your channel, hooefully you'll connect with another retro photographer?
I actually consciously choose the version without the light meter for simplicity‘s sake, however, yes, having one definitely makes the FT a somewhat more complete package.
The quality of film emulsions now are superior to most available when this camera was released. Loaded with Kodak Ektar, Portra 160 or ILFORD PanF or FP4 plus, superb portraits can be obtained. 👌
@@noahvonhatten Yep. I'm in my 70s, so I remember Kodachrome 25, Agfapan 25, Kodak TechPan and Panatomic-X. .. all gone now, but available is a 20 ASA film from Adox. It resolves extraordinary detail, but like TechPan, when processed for maximum resolution, it can appear a tad flat. But the information is all there. I'm wondering about that 40mm lens you have. What is the closest focus distance? Thanks for the video, by the way. Cheers, Kevin.
One of the most pleasing looking body designs. Only gripe is portrait mode. Shooting stealth street in landscape can be a little frustrating. Who cares? I’m going to load up mine right now. Long overdue…
Well... 72 frames is cool but 54 are better when you can switch between 1/2 frame and full frame in one camera.... Yup, the 1965 Konica Auto-Reflex (north america) Konica Autorex (Asia)
The Pen Fs shutter isnt on its side the viewfinders orientation is due to the half frame format, there is no way to get a land scape frame with the film running horizontally. The prism used is a porro prism through a series of mirrors instead of usual Roof penta prism type this is why it doesnt have the usual hump associated with SLRs not that the prism is on its side.
You‘re right. However, at the end of the day, relative to a normal 35mm camera the orientation of the viewfinder and the images on the negative appear to be rotated on its side.
Bought, tried, and sold off a Pen FT system about 30 years ago. The design of the viewfinder makes it relatively dim. Most models were the TTL metered version, which takes a third of the viewfinder light, making it really dim. Olympus offered an inventory impressive but expensive lenses, such as the 40mm 1.4 he shows here. But most Pen F buyers used the camera as a fancy version of the Pen snapshot pocket cameras and didn't pay the high prices for them - few were sold. Most lenses were hard to find 30 years ago, and are nearly impossible to get today. Summary: Great toy or collectible, but not a good user.
I completely disagree on that it isn't a good user. A number of the lens aren't that hard to find. Yes there are some rare ones. There are adapters to OM and M42 lens as well. The Pen F not Pen FT has a great viewfinder.
@@robertcoates2752 Actually, the original Pen F had several design deficiencies Olympus needed to correct immediately. These improvements were incorporated in the Pen FT, but its very dim viewfinder and clumsy number matching system for TTL metering took the edge off the system. The final model. the Pen FV, kept the improvements of the FT and eliminated the TTL meter, making the viewfinder reasonable to use. The FV was treated as a "lesser" or cheaper model at the time (late 1960s), so not so many were sold compared to the FT, but today, the FV is more highly prized, as shown by its used price (often triple an FT) and infrequent availability. Considering that the half frame format was always more a consumer, casual snap shooter usage, there are a number of Canon and other fixed lens models which are smaller, lighter, easier to use, and have lenses of equal or better performance than the Pen F. The only thing the Pen F has going for it is its mutli-lens interchangeability in competition with full frame SLRs, a contest which it eventually lost.
@@robertcoates2752 The FT introduced some significant internal improvements over the original version, but its TTL metering negatively compensated for those. The very last model (FV?) had the FT improvements, but dropped the internal metering, resulting in a reasonable viewfinder as well. It was intended as a cheapened version to milk the last customers before closing out the Pen-F, but now it is by far the most expensive used version and very hard to find. If I had known more about the camera system details when I bought my FT, I would have gotten an FV and wrapped up a decent spread of lenses/shades, etc, while there was still a chance to do so. My experience with the FT was so negative that I unloaded everything immediately.
@@noahvonhatten That one is gone, one day I will buy another , I had the 24-4 38-1,8 and 150-4 plus adapter for M42- + 50mm 1,8 takumar and tele convertor.
Nice video! I probably won't get one myself but I think half-frames are pretty neat :) One thing I want to point out though is that smaller image size doesn't necessarily mean lower image quality... the half-frame is simply a cropped full-frame, and this has no impact on resolution or clarity. Those things depend on the lens and film characteristics rather than imaging size. This is unlike in digital cameras, where smaller sensors have the potential to increase the electrical noise in your image. And in fact, between a crop sensor and a full-frame sensor with the same number of megapixels, the crop technically has greater resolution. However, one aspect of image quality that smaller imaging area does affect, as you mentioned, is depth of field as it may require you to step back from the subject to fit it in the frame.
the grain size is what ends up being affected as you will need to enlarge the image 2x of that of the 35mm negative. This is why i pretty much only shoot my pen f on ektar
How do you manage to save money using half-frame because there is no saving in film processing because the film is the same length as a 36 exp .As for printing nobody is going to print 72 prints for the cost of 36 .I just can’t see how it is any cheaper.
I don’t often print my photos, and while of course the processing costs don’t change, 72 photos is still twice as many photos at the same price as 36 with a conventional camera if you think of it as cost per frame.
FYI, if you grip the aperture ring and pull it outward you can rotate it so the f stops are on top.
my grandpa have one of this pen-f. great camera it is stil working and has a set of 4 original lenses
Fastest subscribe I’ve ever done. The pacing and informations of your vids feels very adequate to me. That combined with the jazz music is just perfect. Love it man!
Thank you!
A mate picked up a Pen F for me at an op shop a while back not yet had chance to run a roll though it. Awesome review cheers.
Excellent video. Wow. And pairing this half frame with the Rollei 80 iso film looks absolutely stunning. Thanks so much
The f stop guide numbers seem to have been added to assist the rather unusual metering system in the Ft I understand the ring can be rotated to have the f numbers on the top, my 35mm f1.8 only has the f values. I have the F. I find using a meter (or a phone app ) adds to the experience of using film
This was a very informative video! I've thought about getting a half frame camera so that I can try creating diptychs. The Olympus Pen F looks great!
This is probably my favorite looking camera of all time, I just love it so much. I currently only own the original Pen which isn't as pleasing to look at to me but still a great camera.
You can adjust the Aperture ring to have the F stops on top, it flips over. Just pull it a bit, and turn it around.
Really? I didn't know. Thanks!
Lenses with ("aperture") numbers 1-6 (or 1-7) are later versions made for the Pen FT. The numbers correlate with the built-in, but not synchronized light meter. You need to read the number shown on the scale on the left of the viewfinder and then set the aperture to the number on the lens. Quite weird, but once you get used to it, it works fine without taking your eyes off the viewfinder. All you have to do is count to the disered number by clicking the aperture ring from 1 to the number you want, and you're done. As described, to better use these lenses with the Pen-F (or FV), you can rotate the aperture ring 180 degrees to set the usual f-numbers.
@@heinundpiet are you on Facebook? …we have a group Olympus Pen F/FT/FV
Great in-depth review. Thank you!
There's another half frame, interchangeable lens, slr camera, the Konica Autoreflex which could also be set to shoot in full frame. It's one of the best underrated camera of all times...
This is a gorgeous camera, superior in so many ways to the Olympus Pen F, not only that but you can switch back and forth between full frame and 1/2 frame. Unlike the Pen F, you can actually focus the image correctly, where you can only guess with Pen F.
That is true, but it’s not purely a half frame camera so I didn’t really count it. It is however a fascinating camera I want to shoot one day.
I found the Konica Autorex bigger and heavier than I like and the shutter release button had a lot of travel. The images were really good and it’s fine to use. I think the 57mm f1.4 lens is ace. It’s great to have (effectively) a choice of two focal lengths for portraits.
The Konica Eye looks like an interesting half-frame camera I’d like to try.
@@clarhettcoalfield3616 What do you mean you can only guess with the Pen F? The Pen F is an SLR so you focus like any other SLR.
The Canon Sure Shot Multi Tele is a great point and shoot half frame camera.
I love the look and feel of my Pen FT ... since I loved DISC film, I am not concerned about grain from a small format!!! I dig half frame stuff, great for Diptychs!!!
I love Diptychs too!
It's a gem! Thanks for uploading.
I have 2.
The FV in silver and a mint FT in black.I had kanto camera build in a split screen focus mechanicism in the fr. I love it
you deserve more subs
There are couple other purely half frame cameras that aren't zone focus and have interchangable lens. But they are extremely rare and extremely expensive. The Robot Royal 18 and the Leica 72. Both rangefinders.
I hadn't heard of the Leica 72 before, interesting. Thanks!
Man, what a great video. Definitely earned my sub. Keep up the great work man. One day when I'm big, maybe I'll make videos as good as yours haha
I’d thought about buying one of these just to have a candid camera always next to me . But in those situations you’d also like to have a very low light camera .
A 40mm f/1.2 Voigtlander on a 35mm M mount rangefinder maybe.
I’m also looking at the Leica M5 . Of course not as portable. The light meter is really handy for those fast candid movements that usually happen in dimmer lighting.
I was thinking HP5 shot at 800 iso
Thanks for sharing, this is another retro camera on my radar.
I currently have the Olympus Pen EE half frame camera.
I've added your channel, hooefully you'll connect with another retro photographer?
Awesome & Thanks :)
Ernie was right about the number 9.
one of the lens: "Olympus Zuiko Pen F 1:1.8/38mm" seems to have radiation, should we concern about it?
thanks dud3
Seems to me the FT is by far the most practical version since it’s the only one with a built-in light meter.
I actually consciously choose the version without the light meter for simplicity‘s sake, however, yes, having one definitely makes the FT a somewhat more complete package.
You can buy a specialised Pen F light meter that slots over the shutter dial on the front of the camera.
The quality of film emulsions now are superior to most available when this camera was released. Loaded with Kodak Ektar, Portra 160 or ILFORD PanF or FP4 plus, superb portraits can be obtained. 👌
This is true! I agree, with modern film stocks the quality this camera can delivery is superb, I would say the optics certainly play a roll in that.
@@noahvonhatten Yep. I'm in my 70s, so I remember Kodachrome 25, Agfapan 25, Kodak TechPan and Panatomic-X. .. all gone now, but available is a 20 ASA film from Adox. It resolves extraordinary detail, but like TechPan, when processed for maximum resolution, it can appear a tad flat. But the information is all there. I'm wondering about that 40mm lens you have. What is the closest focus distance? Thanks for the video, by the way. Cheers, Kevin.
@@kevin-parratt-artist The close focus distance is .35m or 1.15 ft. Which isn’t bad at all in my opinion.
@@noahvonhatten Isn't bad.. full stop! 👌
One of the most pleasing looking body designs. Only gripe is portrait mode. Shooting stealth street in landscape can be a little frustrating. Who cares? I’m going to load up mine right now. Long overdue…
Well... 72 frames is cool but 54 are better when you can switch between 1/2 frame and full frame in one camera.... Yup, the 1965 Konica Auto-Reflex (north america) Konica Autorex (Asia)
That a really fascinating camera. Unfortunately I’ve never had one in hand.
Nice eyelashes
The Pen Fs shutter isnt on its side the viewfinders orientation is due to the half frame format, there is no way to get a land scape frame with the film running horizontally. The prism used is a porro prism through a series of mirrors instead of usual Roof penta prism type this is why it doesnt have the usual hump associated with SLRs not that the prism is on its side.
You‘re right. However, at the end of the day, relative to a normal 35mm camera the orientation of the viewfinder and the images on the negative appear to be rotated on its side.
Bought, tried, and sold off a Pen FT system about 30 years ago. The design of the viewfinder makes it relatively dim. Most models were the TTL metered version, which takes a third of the viewfinder light, making it really dim. Olympus offered an inventory impressive but expensive lenses, such as the 40mm 1.4 he shows here. But most Pen F buyers used the camera as a fancy version of the Pen snapshot pocket cameras and didn't pay the high prices for them - few were sold. Most lenses were hard to find 30 years ago, and are nearly impossible to get today. Summary: Great toy or collectible, but not a good user.
I completely disagree on that it isn't a good user. A number of the lens aren't that hard to find. Yes there are some rare ones. There are adapters to OM and M42 lens as well. The Pen F not Pen FT has a great viewfinder.
@@robertcoates2752 Actually, the original Pen F had several design deficiencies Olympus needed to correct immediately. These improvements were incorporated in the Pen FT, but its very dim viewfinder and clumsy number matching system for TTL metering took the edge off the system. The final model. the Pen FV, kept the improvements of the FT and eliminated the TTL meter, making the viewfinder reasonable to use. The FV was treated as a "lesser" or cheaper model at the time (late 1960s), so not so many were sold compared to the FT, but today, the FV is more highly prized, as shown by its used price (often triple an FT) and infrequent availability. Considering that the half frame format was always more a consumer, casual snap shooter usage, there are a number of Canon and other fixed lens models which are smaller, lighter, easier to use, and have lenses of equal or better performance than the Pen F. The only thing the Pen F has going for it is its mutli-lens interchangeability in competition with full frame SLRs, a contest which it eventually lost.
@@robertcoates2752 The FT introduced some significant internal improvements over the original version, but its TTL metering negatively compensated for those. The very last model (FV?) had the FT improvements, but dropped the internal metering, resulting in a reasonable viewfinder as well. It was intended as a cheapened version to milk the last customers before closing out the Pen-F, but now it is by far the most expensive used version and very hard to find. If I had known more about the camera system details when I bought my FT, I would have gotten an FV and wrapped up a decent spread of lenses/shades, etc, while there was still a chance to do so. My experience with the FT was so negative that I unloaded everything immediately.
Yea, they are lovely, mine kit was stollen, though.
That's rotten. Is there a chance you'd be able to get it back?
@@noahvonhatten That one is gone, one day I will buy another , I had the 24-4 38-1,8 and 150-4 plus adapter for M42- + 50mm 1,8 takumar and tele convertor.
Films are shot on half frame size
“Really, really!”, “Very, very!”
Nice video! I probably won't get one myself but I think half-frames are pretty neat :) One thing I want to point out though is that smaller image size doesn't necessarily mean lower image quality... the half-frame is simply a cropped full-frame, and this has no impact on resolution or clarity. Those things depend on the lens and film characteristics rather than imaging size. This is unlike in digital cameras, where smaller sensors have the potential to increase the electrical noise in your image. And in fact, between a crop sensor and a full-frame sensor with the same number of megapixels, the crop technically has greater resolution. However, one aspect of image quality that smaller imaging area does affect, as you mentioned, is depth of field as it may require you to step back from the subject to fit it in the frame.
the grain size is what ends up being affected as you will need to enlarge the image 2x of that of the 35mm negative. This is why i pretty much only shoot my pen f on ektar
@@iop223 For sure, enlarging any photo totally does make grain more apparent, and so the fine grain of Ektar makes it a great pick :)
None of this is accurate
@@HenrySavageMode Care to elaborate? If I'm wrong I would love to learn
one of the few talking head photography videos that doesn't infuriate and annoy me
Basically an aps-c film camera... snort
How do you manage to save money using half-frame because there is no saving in film processing because the film is the same length as a 36 exp .As for printing nobody is going to print 72 prints for the cost of 36 .I just can’t see how it is any cheaper.
I don’t often print my photos, and while of course the processing costs don’t change, 72 photos is still twice as many photos at the same price as 36 with a conventional camera if you think of it as cost per frame.