> From: R. Lee Hawkins <lhawkins@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: lhawkins@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [OM] OM-2000
> Date: Thursday, May 14, 1998 4:08 AM
>
>> I challenge anyone to show me a review article in a photographic
> magazine that criticizes any camera body. To judge from the reviews
> I've read, only minor things are criticized, but other than that, every
> camera body ever made walks on water, if you believe the reviews.
>
> Cheers,
> --Lee
>
Actually, the Pop. Photography have not avoid saying any bad things in
their review, they just don't want to emphasis them. If you have read a lot
of testing report from them, you will got your own acceptance level for
each device and make a judge from their result. Take the OM2000 test report
as an example:
-----------------
For outlook, they point out the top and bottom plastic, uncomfortable DOF
preview button. ISO window and numbers are tiny.
For function, no TTL flash or in-finder signal, un-centered centerweighted
metering, spot metering area is large and also not centered. Only 86
0.000000ield
of view, system time lag 205ms (my 600SI is 92ms). +/- 1/4 stop shutter
speed accuracy is not very good (in the past there was shutter speed curve
shown, if the shutter got 1/4 stop error at shortest speed is okay, but not
at all speed).
Others, the sound level is too high (might cause excessive vibration).
------------------
By ignoring some subjective comments and look at the data reported, you
will know how good the devices is. Generally, if they said something is
well above average, then that is good; above average is normal; average is
poor .....
For lens test SQF, only look at the last column, which shown 20x24 inch
photo quality. To me, above 70 is just acceptable, 80 is good and 90 is
excellent.
C.H.Ling
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|