Olympus XA-2

[minoly]

The Olympus XA-2 is strictly a zone focus camera-- three zones and that's it. For that matter, I don't think that I ever moved the zone tab for the rest of the 36 exposure roll I used for these photos. When the XA-2 came out (1980), I didn't pay much attention to it: I had one camera then and so I wasn't in the market for another one. With the current market for used film camera, that common attitude has changed, so about two years ago I bought the XA-2 that made these photos. Because I hadn't used it that much since the purchase, I put in that big roll of Neopan 400 and resolved to use only the XA-2 till I'd finished it. It was relaxing to have the convenience of total point and shoot. Here are some of the results. They were all taken at Como Park, near where I live in St. Paul, and the film was developed in D76 1:1 with scanning done at home.

McNeeley Conservatory from the SW. I guess that the diagonal fence is there to keep people and animals from the wet sod; in a way it goes well with the metal ribs of the structures.

South Wall and Porch of Sunken Garden. The decoration below the porch roof seems to echo the flowers inside.

Detail of Porch and upper story.

Trees at ease near Conservatory. Snow had recently melted when this photo was taken; it came back a few days later.

I used the XA-2 inside the city for all the rest of the roll, taking photos of development along University Avenue. It was suitable for almost all the subjects I came across. Besides the convenience and ease of use, when I saw the negatives and scans I liked the sharpness and depth that the 35mm f/3.5 lens produced.

Bill Delehanty
(edited 11/17/15 to restore images lost due to server problem)

[PFMcFarland]

Got one sitting on the bench waiting for new seals. Then I hope it works! Fine results from yours, Bill.

[Philip]

I've had several XAs over the past 20-odd years. Their lenses are really good, as your pictures show, and the XA-2 is not very much different from the original XA in that way. The lack of a rangefinder in the XA-2 is only a minor loss and I -- in my sixties -- regular use my XA as if it had no rangefinder anyway: its rf image is usually too difficult for me nowadays! The XA family are all excellent cameras but they do have some electronic or electric problems, notably when the shutter button dies or when the camera gets stuck in self-timer mode. The cameras are all over thirty years old, after all, and have 1980s electroncs.

I've got a roll of ten-years-expired Konica Centuria Super 200 in my still-working XA right now.

[Captain Slack]

To me, the XA cameras are technological marvels. How they got such a fantastic lens into such a small body is amazing!

I actually prefer the XA2 to the XA. I find the VF easier to see with my glasses and losing the RF wasn't a big deal. Just need to remember to change the focus slider!

[Bennybee]

Great pictures with that Oly! I've always admired the concept of those XA's but never bought or used one myself.
Love that 'Detail of Porch' picture. Nice contrast.

[Julio1fer]

Another + for the XA2, it was my preferred travel camera until It fell into hard pavement. Very nice detail and tones in these series, I like the first one most (the conservatory) - it looks right out of the 19th century future.

[BillyBob]

Just need to remember to change the focus slider!

Exactly!! I've gotten a few blurry shots back due to that forgetfulness. I have the focal ranges written on a piece of masking tape on the back.

But I love how quick the XA-2 is to use - and that it defaults to a 'most likely' focus scenario. I only wish that it went higher than ISO800; it's such a subtle little camera that it'd be nice for discreet low-light photography - a couple-stop push would be handy.

I found my two at the Sally Ann for less than $10 each. And then a friend gave be an XA.

Happy Easter!
Bill