*- DORIS FANG -* wrote:
>
> It depends on what the user wants. The Epic is the smallest of the trio,
> has a highly-rated lens and the clamshell design. The T-4 S. Has the
> Zeiss mystique, backed by positive reviews from practically everyone
> on the planet, and in its latest incarnation, the waist-level finder
> (which is not full frame, btw). I believe it has weatherproofing like the
> Stylus E, and similar controls.
> The XA is a world apart. It is an older design, larger in size than
> either Stylus E. or T-4S (with either A-11 or A-16 attached). If you are
> the kind of photographer that shoots in what I refer to as the "coma" mode
> (all auto, all the time, on program), the XA will be a hindrance. But if
> you desire a little control of depth of field, a stronger flash, the
> ability to do precise fill-flash (and are able to comprehend manual
> fill-flash) and very long exposures, the XA is the ticket, unless you
> want to pop for a Titanium Nikon in either 28 or 35 versions.
> But I don't want to do anything to help drive XA prices any higher...
> after all, I only have three (and an XA2), and might have to pick up a few
> more before they get scarce.
> In conclusion, all three are fine instruments and each has its
> strengths. The W.Level finder of the T-4 is unique, the Stylus E. is tiny
> and very sharp, and the XA allows --- and demands --- more user input, and
> to maximize its potential, good old-fashioned photographic knowledge. It
> all depends on how you work...
> *= Doris Fang =*
Sober (I'm guessing) and thought provoking answers. Thank you.
< 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 >
|