It’s a rumble in the mechanical jungle! Last year I pitted my Nikon F5 against the Minolta Maxxum 9, and I had a lot of fun doing that review, not to prove which camera is better but to show the difference between the two top dog professional cameras. And I have been waiting for a chance to repeat the format for some other cameras. So why not take out two iconic small-format SLRs that came out in the 1970s, sadly I had very view from that era, at least until recently when I got a pair of them. Today we’re going to compare the Olympus OM-1n the improved version of the original OM-1 with the Nikon FM, one of many cameras that came out in the aftermath of the OM revolution. Again, as before, this isn’t to determine which camera is better, but rather to show off the differences between the two and help you choose which system to choose.

Nikon FM and Olympus OM-1n
The two cameras going head-to-head today!
SpecificationNikon FMOlympus OM-1n
TypeSingle Lens ReflexSingle Lens Reflex
Format135 (36x24mm)135 (36x24mm)
LensInterchangeable, Nikon F-MountInterchangeable, Olympus OM-Mount
Dimensions (WxHxD)142x89.5x60.5mm136x83x50mm
Weight (w/o batteries)590g510g
MeterCentre-Weighted TTL Metering, 2x GPD Cells, EV1 ~ EV18 @ ASA-100, ASA-12 ~ 3200Centre-Weighted TTL Metering, 2x CdS Cells, EV2 ~ EV17 @ ASA-100
ShutterVertical-travel, metal focal-plane shutter, 1" - 1/1000" + BulbRubberized Silk Horizontal Travel Focal Plane Shutter, 1" - 1/1000" + Bulb

For this review, each camera is equipped with a 50mm f/1.8 lens both the Olympus and Nikon lenses have the same optical build (6 Elements, 5 Groups) the only difference in the actual construction is the aperture blades; the Nikon has 7, the Olympus has 6. Both cameras were loaded with Eastman Double-X film, exposed at ASA-250 and developed in Kodak D-76 (1+1) for ten minutes. Sadly the meter in the OM-1n is not working (battery), so to even the odds, I ran with the ReveniLabs Meter on the OM-1n and the stock meter in the Nikon FM. In the comparison images, the images shot on the Nikon FM will be on the left side and the OM-1n on the right side.

An Olympus OM-1n and Nikon FM shot on each other.
You can already see the difference, with the FM and OM-1n in regards to metering.

Ergonomics – Camera Feel
Despite being so close in size, the two cameras have a radically different feel in hand. Both cameras are very close in size and only 10 grams difference in weight, with the OM-1n being the smaller and lighter of the two. But the way they sit and balance in hand and around the next feel very different. The Nikon FM feels like a smaller Nikkormat, no surprise as it came out as a direct successor to that line of cameras whereas the OM-1n is light and well balanced in hand. Amazing how much 10g will feel in hand. When it comes to the controls and layout, both cameras are different yet well laid out at the same time. I cannot pick which one is generally easier to operate in the field as I’m used to both interfaces by this point. But if you’re used to one or the other switching can be a little troublesome. See, on the Olympus, the shutter speed dial is around the lens mount, but it is smooth with just a slight resistance to indicate the stops, at least there is a clear separation between speeds and the apertures which are at the edge of the lens barrel. Whereas on the Nikon has the shutter speed dial on the top of the camera body and has solid clicks when you set the shutter speed. The film advances are both comfortable in hand, although the OM-1n does have a longer stroke than the Nikon. But having that more massive build with the FM, I would be more likely to take the FM into a battle zone than the OM-1n. But in terms of ergonomics and feel I give a slight edge to the OM-1n, it has a much smoother feel to the camera and its operations.

Railroad Bridge over a four lane road
These two images are approximately equal in exposure.
Again, you see both of these appear to be about equal. But the Zuiko optics are showing slightly sharper than the Nikkor.

Experience – Out and About
The most significant difference between the two cameras comes with when you’re out in the field with them. While the weight and size are about equal and both feel excellent in hand. However, in the area, I have to say the FM does edge out over the OM-1n. First, the FM has far more feedback in the viewfinder than the OM-1n, the FM does have the shutter speed and aperture displayed inside the viewer, the OM-1n has only the match needle. No indication of your camera’s settings. The FM also has, as I mentioned before, has a much shorter stroke on the film advance but a much heavier one. While the OM-1n is longer but far smoother, I would not want to use either camera in low light as both lacks any sort of illumination. Although the FM does use the three diodes, you need to memorise what each one indicates. Although the FM system, I would prefer the match-needle of the OM-1n. The viewfinder in the OM-1n is brighter than the FM, but I think if my FM’s finder were a little cleaner, they would be about equal. The FM also has a far more satisfying shutter sound having that metal bladed Copal Square Shutter certainly has a sense of finality that the OM-1n lacks. However, in some situations, a quiet shutter is not a bad thing. Both are joys to use in the field, but not at the same time as both have radically different control layouts, and I often found myself struggling to adapt quickly between the two. But I certainly like having that extra feedback in the viewfinder the FM gives.

You can clearly see the loss of shadow detail.
An old tree next to railroad tracks
You can again see the loss of shadow detail with the three between the two.

Image Quality
When it comes to image quality, there are two separate parts I want to talk about. The first is exposure; now I can’t compare the two meters equally as the OM-1n was not using its stock CdS meter, instead, I used a ReveniLabs unit. And here’s the most significant difference between the two. I found that with the OM-1n/ReveniLabs saw some losses in the shadows and often metered a good stop under what I got with the Nikon FM. Thankfully the film has enough latitude that it didn’t matter. When it comes to exposure, I will have to give the edge to the FM only for better capture of both highlights and shadows. The second factor is image sharpness, and here the two are about equal, about equal. But after a closer look between the two, I do have to give the edge to the Zuiko glass, both lenses although equal optically and in many cases, I was shooting at about f/16, I just found that the Olympus images are just a touch sharper than what I got out of the Nikkor glass.

Railroad Tracks
Not too bad here, both are about equal.
Condo Building
These two are again equal although there’s that loss of shadow detail.

The Final Verdict
I have to admit; this verses post has been a hard one to write because unlike the F5 versus the Maxxum 9. Both cameras are excellent and reliable choices when out in the field. I guess it all comes down to selection in the end. When it comes to the overall layout and functionality, I have to give the edge to the Nikon FM as you get a lot more feedback in the viewfinder and having a more traditional design to the controls. Plus having that nice short film advance is a certain plus. I also found the GPD a little more sensitive than the CdS cells. But when it comes to optics, as hard as it is to say, the Zuiko glass certainly outshines the Nikkor lenses. I’ve come to like both cameras and certainly can’t wait to explore both systems more, especially the OM-System.


  1. Neat comparison! I started on the FM and then tried the OM-1 out of curiosity and prefer it in many ways.

    The small body with large controls and finder really appeal to me. The OM-1 is a bit Leica-like in this regard, and also in the orientation of the aperture and focus controls and rewind release. It’s a good SLR to accompany a Leica rangefinder both in terms of familiar feel but also in terms of stealthiness and reduced bulk to carry.

    I find the around-the-lens shutter speed fast and intuitive and wish Nikon had stuck with it on a more modern camera than just the Nikkormat series. I also find that the often physically smaller Zuiko lenses have a nice pop and bokeh rendering that Nikkors do not. I’d agree with your observations about slightly better sharpness, particularly with the 50/1.8’s.

    Sadly, I choose the FM series over the OM series 90% of the time because Oly lacks the lens variety of Nikon, wider metering range, LED meter readout and a professional grade manual body.

    When I’m shooting something casual, that doesn’t require low light work, multiple bodies, or the need to handle abuse, I tend to choose my OM-1n. But I can’t imagine bashing a pair of them around from morning till night at a wedding shoot and in bad weather. A, I don’t think they’d stand up, given the various technical issues I’ve had with several OM-1’s and B, they are just not quite THERE for me with the metering.

    Thanks for the cool blog idea!

  2. I have three Om’s Om1n, Om2n and OM3. the Om3 is much heftier – body made of brass..but the spot metering system is outstanding. Of the three the 2 is much handier to use when you put it in auto mode (Apeture priority).
    As for the Om1 you can adapt 1.4 volt hearing aid zinc-air batteries using rubber o-rings to fit in the battery compartment. (Energizer size 13). the .05 volt difference is negligible – i’ve done some intensive comparisons using a variety of metering systems (digital camera with comparable lens, Gossens, etc) and the reading are almost always within 1/3 of a stop. Of course you can also have the camera light meter circuit modified.

    On a final note: the aperture signs on early model M Zuiko lenses were very stiff – Olympus then changed the design aperture ring design to give it a smooth action. I have the old version and it is noticeably stiffer – but I took it to my camera repairer who was able to adjust it slightly.

    as for the OM system – if James Bond used the camera (Om4ti) then its good enough for me

  3. The OM shutter speed ring is “self indicating”. I use my left thumb and second finger, placed on the two grooved sections, to set the shutter speed, and I can feel exacltly what speed is set by the position of my fingers. I can go from 1/1000 to 1s without lifting my fingers from the ring.

    I use my left thumb and first finger to set the lens aperture. It is not as definite as with the shutter speed, but the lenses provide tactile feednback to ley you know where they are set.

    Another little nice thing: every OM Zuiko lens has the focal length engraved on the aperture ring next to the fstest stop and coloured green. This means that at a glance, you are in no doubt as to what lens you have on the camera, despite many of these little Zuikos looking more or less the same! Not like Nikkors!

    The early OMs are almost unbreakable! The chrome (black was too expensive) OM-1 I bought in 1976 still works perfectly! It has been used, abused, and been through hell, being dopped countles times, and soaked as well. I never did the battery conversion, since I thought it was getting a bit knackered. So I bought a black OM-1n about 10-15 years ago, had its battery converted, and still it plodds on! I might do a “Five Frames” with the original OM-1, because it is still a perfectly functional camera.

    An anecote: a few years ago, I was in a camera shop, to look at the latest whatever DSLR. I grumbled about the small, dull viewfinder, and the lad behind the counter said that it was “the best ever!!”. I took my OM-1 out of my jacket pocket, and said “rubbish, have a lookl through that!”. He was so amazed, he got all of his mates out of the back shop to have a look as well.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.