Olympus Pen FT or Canon Demi EE17 For 35mm Half Frame?

[braxus]

I was looking at these two cameras for a fun intro to half frame. I thought it would be fun to play with one of these and use pictures when I want to exaggerate grain in the film and a softer look. Plus it gives you almost 80 shots per roll of 36. I can scan up to 10,000 dpi on my film scanner (though optically its only 5000), so I can get the most out of the film itself. I'd scan two frames at a time and split them up in Photoshop.

So the two cameras I was looking at are the Canon Demi EE17 and the Olympus Pen FT. The Olympus is a bit more expensive, but comes with a removable lens, and I'd assume the lens may be slightly better technically. But Im also a Canon guy and their Demi's seemed to be sleepers of the pack. Prices range between 200 and 300 Canadian, depending on which of the two you get.

So would you make the jump to the better Olympus or is the Canon basically as good?

 

[Les Sarile]

If you don't need different lens options then maybe the Canon would be better for you.

But the Olympus Pen FT has a variety of lenses and adapters for practically all the other lens mounts. I use a Nikon adapter and can use those lenses and autobellows.

Olympus Pen FT by Les DMess, on Flickr

 

[braxus]

It would be nice to have removable lenses if I ever decided to get a different lens for it, but I really like the TTL viewfinder in the Olympus. Would it be fair to say the Zuiko 38mm 1.8 might optically be better than the Canon 30mm 1.7? I might spend the extra amount on the Olympus (its 30 percent more money), but Im not counting out the Canon just yet.

What kind of semi wide angle lenses can I get for the FT?

 

[Les Sarile]

It would be nice to have removable lenses if I ever decided to get a different lens for it, but I really like the TTL viewfinder in the Olympus. Would it be fair to say the Zuiko 38mm 1.8 might optically be better than the Canon 30mm 1.7? I might spend the extra amount on the Olympus (its 30 percent more money), but Im not counting out the Canon just yet.

I have no idea how good the Canon lens is although every name brand manual fixed lens I have tested have never been the reason for poor results. I have taken some shots with the one Olympus Pen lens I have and it does not lack for quality of results.

Regarding the TTL metering in the Pen FT, it isn't as straight forward to use as a typical meter say in the OM1 or similar. It's been awhile so I'll have to refresh my memory but it took a little getting used to at first. Also, it uses the obsolete battery but mine had an inline diode installed to drop the voltage from a modern battery and calibrated for it when I had it CLA'd.

BTW, I also tested some of these lenses using Kodak Techpan @ ISO25 processed in Technidol and my 4000dpi Coolscan cannot fully achieve all the detail that was captured on the film.

 

[braxus]

WeinCell makes a PX625 Zinc Air battery that is 1.35 volts and is said to be the only real option for these old cameras. Anyone use the Wein battery? Its sold on Amazon. Both the Canon and Olympus use the 625 battery.

 

[MattKing]

There are a lot of different ways to deal with the need to replace the mercury based PX625 batteries. The Wein cell branded approach is both inconvenient (due to short life) and expensive.
I have used or do use both the adapters for currently available silver oxide cells (expensive but long lasting) and the adapters for zinc air (hearing aid) cells (inexpensive, readily available, but short life) and both approaches have their benefits. Having the camera modified is another option.

 

[Bronson Dugnutt]

The Demis (and fixed-lens Pens) are a crapshoot mechanically. They weren't built to the same standards as the FT, an SLR, and offer a very different shooting experience. Opt for a film tested example if at all possible.

The FT is great if you can afford native glass or can use an adapter with stop-down or external metering. I can't comment on batteries as neither my FV or Demi S accept them. They only power the meter in any case, while the shutter actuations are fully mechanical.

The lenses in all the aforementioned cameras are optimized for the format so don't spend too much time hand-wringing over the optics.

 

[braxus]

I have used or do use both the adapters for currently available silver oxide cells (expensive but long lasting) ...

Matt. What adapter with what battery are you using for this configuration?

 

[braxus]

I see there is a 20mm f3.5 lens for the FT. I'm not sure what that equates to in FF numbers.

 

[MattKing]

Matt. What adapter with what battery are you using for this configuration?

I have a couple of inexpensive mechanical adapters that I purchased through Jon Goodman (of camera light seal fame) that permit use of 675 sized hearing aid batteries.
And there are a number of different suppliers of the diode based mechanical and voltage adapters that permit use of silver oxide cells.
The sources change from time to time - many purchase through eBay.
The last "name brand" adapters were sold by Gossen, but I'm not sure if those are still available.

 

[Huss]

I use thus adapter in my Pen FT. Works perfectly.

Edit - this is not a dumb adapter, it has a diode in it that corrects the voltage from 1.5 to 1.35

MR9 MR-9 PX625 PX13 Battery Adapter for Film Camera & Exposure Meter / Mercury | eBay

Price is for one adapter only. Use of 386 / SR43W Silver Oxide battery (1.55 V) to.

www.ebay.com

 

[Cholentpot]

I use the Pen F, EE3, and Univex Mercury.

If I had to choose I'd stick with the F. No meter or battery to worry about. I worry about losing the cap of the EE3 and burning out the element on the front and the Univex is difficult to load and is a guess focus camera.

 

[Patrick Robert James]

I have both. On the plus side the FT has accurate focus. On the downside it is very difficult to focus. The semi-silvered mirror inside will probably be shot at this point. I had to replace mine. The spring on the shutter is pretty strong so hand holding slow speeds is iffy. It is nice and small though. Overall I'd say it is a meh. Not very fond of it. Could have been a better camera. One of these days I will strip it and put a nice modern focusing screen in it. That should brighten up the finder considerably and make the camera much more usable.

I had to take apart the Demi EE 17 to get it to work properly, but that is the case for most old cameras these days. The shutter was sticky when I got it. The only downside to it is the lack of focus accuracy. It is a shame they didn't put a rangefinder in the camera because if they did it would be a spectacular little camera. The lens on it is better than the 38mm on the FT. At least in my case it is. I tend to use grainy black and white film in the FT and color film in the Canon but I really don't use them all that much.

 

[Nitroplait]

Kanto Camera's MR-9 adapter/converter is as branded as it gets but the required SR43 battery is not as easy to find as many other batteries.

Wein is crazy overpriced - it is no different than a zink-air hearing aid battery which is dirt cheap (6pcs of PR44 for less than $2).

For the hearing aid battery to substitute a PX625 you will need a dumb adapter like the brass versions shown below - which is also inexpensive on eBay. (or you can make one yourself)
If the camera uses PX675, you can just use the zinc-air PR44 without adapter.

Zinc-air batteries are often labeled 1.4V or 1.45V but all that I have bought including Wein measures very close to 1.365V. They normally last 4-6 months after removing air hole tape. (depletes regardless if you use them or not).

 

[wiltw]

An alternative to using air cells (which deplete themselves even without use, once its adhesive seal is taken off) is to use what is referred to as the 'MR-9' adapter. But these days one has to be careful in purchasing the RIGHT so-called 'MR-9'

1. The original MR-9 takes a silver oxide battery and converts the 1.55V down to very close to the constant 1.35V provided by mercuric oxide cells originall
2. The 'false' MR-9 has a hole drilled to admit air to the air cell, and does zero voltage step-down...it merely mechanically adapts air cells to fit in the battery compartment which was sized for the larger mercuric oxide

Both can be found on e-Bay, but #1 is the better thing to buy. The very original MR-9 which adapted the silver oxide 386 battery was offered by CRIS, and is still available

MR-9 Mercury Battery Adapter

Our mercury battery adapters are the perfect solution for vintage collector cameras and equipment that were designed for use with mercury batteries.

shop.criscam.com

 

[M-88]

Technicalities aside, interchangeable camera vs fixed lens camera comparison also has to do with user's mindset. I have an SLR, I have a fixed lens rangefinder. Sometimes I use one, other times I use another. There are days when I don't want to lug around a camera with three lenses and there are days when 500 grams is all I want to carry with me.

 

[brbo]

I have both. Well, I have Pen F not FT. But also have a black FT on the way so you can probably guess which camera I prefer.

They are different beasts entirely. Pen F is loud and big (for a half-frame camera), 20mm (equivalent to 28mm on FF) is not the easiest to focus on F (maybe FT's central microprism patch will help with that, but I have my doubts since FT screen will be dimmer than F's). Demi is stealth.

Comparing lenses on them is, at least for me, totally irrelevant. There is no 30mm lens for Pen F and Demi can't be focused precisely. My Demi lens can have a weird hotspot sometimes in the center when shot in bright light (lens seem very clean, so maybe a shutter problem or maybe hood should be used, but that would negate the idea of using a small camera). Pen lenses that I have (38/1.8 and 20/3.5) are better than I expected in basically every regard (surprisingly sharp (after I've adjusted the mirror position) and flare resistant considering the era they were made and the intended format).

 

[Cholentpot]

I have both. Well, I have Pen F not FT. But also have a black FT on the way so you can probably guess which camera I prefer.

They are different beasts entirely. Pen F is loud and big (for a half-frame camera), 20mm (equivalent to 28mm on FF) is not the easiest to focus on F (maybe FT's central microprism patch will help with that, but I have my doubts since FT screen will be dimmer than F's). Demi is stealth.

Comparing lenses on them is, at least for me, totally irrelevant. There is no 30mm lens for Pen F and Demi can't be focused precisely. My Demi lens can have a weird hotspot sometimes in the center when shot in bright light (lens seem very clean, so maybe a shutter problem or maybe hood should be used, but that would negate the idea of using a small camera). Pen lenses that I have (38/1.8 and 20/3.5) are better than I expected in basically every regard (surprisingly sharp (after I've adjusted the mirror position) and flare resistant considering the era they were made and the intended format).

First time I've heard the F referred to as big and loud.

Shutter slap is an issue with the Pen F series though. Below 1/60th things get messy very quickly.

 

[brbo]

First time I've heard the F referred to as big and loud.

I wrote "Pen F is loud and big (for a half-frame camera)". By now I've owned a number of half-frame cameras and can't remember any being as loud. Which half-frame camera is bigger (except for the plastic abominations like Samurai) or louder than Pen F? I'd like to avoid them. I have FF film camera that is less than half the size of Pen F, Nikon F80 SLR that is virtually noiseless compared to Pen F... Is any of that a show stopper? No. But it would never cross my mind to describe Pen F as light or small or quiet (for a half-frame camera).

Shutter slap is an issue with the Pen F series though. Below 1/60th things get messy very quickly.

Curiously, even though you can definitely not only hear but also feel the Pen F shutter, my low shutter speed shots have been mostly better than I had hopped for. I guess most of the shutter shock comes from rotary shutter coming to a stop so it doesn't affect exposure.

 

[Huss]

I have both. On the plus side the FT has accurate focus. On the downside it is very difficult to focus. The semi-silvered mirror inside will probably be shot at this point. I had to replace mine. The spring on the shutter is pretty strong so hand holding slow speeds is iffy. It is nice and small though. Overall I'd say it is a meh. Not very fond of it. Could have been a better camera. One of these days I will strip it and put a nice modern focusing screen in it. That should brighten up the finder considerably and make the camera much more usable.

I think that this shows how much old cameras vary in condition from example to example. My Ft has a clear screen and is easy to focus outdoors, ok to focus indoors. The meter works perfectly and the shutter release is delightfully light and crisp.
The FT that was for sale at my local shop had a brighter vf that was easier to focus, shutter release was great, but the meter was dead.

 

[Cholentpot]

I wrote "Pen F is loud and big (for a half-frame camera)". By now I've owned a number of half-frame cameras and can't remember any being as loud. Which half-frame camera is bigger (except for the plastic abominations like Samurai) or louder than Pen F? I'd like to avoid them. I have FF film camera that is less than half the size of Pen F, Nikon F80 SLR that is virtually noiseless compared to Pen F... Is any of that a show stopper? No. But it would never cross my mind to describe Pen F as light or small or quiet (for a half-frame camera).



Curiously, even though you can definitely not only hear but also feel the Pen F shutter, my low shutter speed shots have been mostly better than I had hopped for. I guess most of the shutter shock comes from rotary shutter coming to a stop so it doesn't affect exposure.

Yes I got that 'For a half frame' And yes my XA collection is smaller than the F series as are a whole bunch of my point and shoots. The OM-1 is not much bigger than the F either.

But I do have issue with low speeds and camera shake. It just might be more magnified because of the smaller frame size?

 

[ant!]

I was also just looking into halfframes, and got both a Canon Demi EE17 and an Olympus Pen EED, for about CAD 50 each from Japan, plus bundled shipping. I am still playing around with them, have to replace the light seals and check the meters (with an hearing aid battery), but both seem still be fine as far as I can see for now, shutter times sound reasonable. The Canon has a much better feeling (more metal etc) over the EED, and I don't like the film advance by wheel instead of lever on the EED. Plus the EE17 works fully manual without battery as well, the EED doesn't. I like the information viewfinder (incl. the guess-focussed distance), but yeah, a rangefinder would be cool. Both have CDS meters, since I wanted to avoid the selenium ones for now, and a 30/1.7 lens. So yeah, if both work still fully ok, I think out of those two I will keep the Demi E17 and sell the Pen EED.
The Pen F & FT are quite a bit more expensive, let's see how I like the halfframe results first. If I do, I'll think about them. Or a Demi C, with the option to swap from 28mm to the 50mm tele, but this is again automatic only (like the Pen EE series) and selenium meter... If the selenium meter is dead, is there a way to make those work? Like a new meter cell, conversion to CDS or similar? Or manual and using only the flash shutter speed of 1/30, which would be a bit limiting?

 

[Les Sarile]

Of course at the time of it's release, the Pen FT was much smaller and lighter then others of the era.

Olympus Pen FT by Les DMess, on Flickr

How about a Konica Auto-Reflex so you can switch between full and half frame at any point on the roll?

Auto-Reflex_FT by Les DMess, on Flickr

This must've driven the labs crazy making prints then . . .

 

[Lee Rust]

Pen F or FT would get my vote, with the 38mm 1.8 lens. On my FTs I've always used hearing aid batteries with tape wrapped around the circumference to improve the fit. My biggest objection to the F cameras is the rather loud CLACK of the shutter, but aside from that they're excellent.

Another fine half-frame is the Olympus Pen S, which is guess-focus but very easy to use, the shutter super quiet and the viewfinder super clear. My Mercury II is lots of fun and very interesting, but takes quite a bit of attention to operate. I have a Demi too, but have never been able to get it working.

 

[r_a_feldman]

I have a Pen FT. It has the advantage of interchangeable lenses. As was posted earlier in this thread, you can use adapters on the FT body to use other brands of lenses. I use both Nikkor AI or non-AI (20mm) and Olympus OM 1 (50mm macro and 28-48mm zoom) lenses with adapters (mine are home made). The focal length conversion factor is about 1.4: 20mm full frame is about 28mm half-frame.

As to the battery, I used to use a zenner diode adapter, but the meter in my FT was getting a bit flakey, so I removed it completely and replaced the semi-silvered mirror with a full-silvered first-surface mirror (see https://kyp.hauslendale.com/classics/forum/messages/2/15109.html?1637223628 and https://kyp.hauslendale.com/classics/forum/messages/2/15119.html?1637188830). You can also get a meterless Pen FV to achieve the same effect. For exposure, I either estimate it now or use myLightMeter on my iPhone.