Hi Francis:
You provided an interesting read.
> i wonder how many buyers are lured [to Canon FD] because there
> were tilt/shift lenses available? i don't know, it would be interesting to
> know.
I would have to say that I am. Or at least I'm holding on to one A-1 body in
case I do. It looks like a great alternative to stopping down to diffraction
limited f stops in landscape photography.
> > > have heard that
> > > olypmus is erratic in terms of the lens performance. they should
> > > dispell this notion and only produce toprate lenses that nobody
> > > can question.
> > Where did you hear that and which lenses are, acording to you, not top
> > of the notch lenses?
> the issue is not whether the lenses are not top notch or not but it is the
> perception of the buying public. the source of this information is, again,
> photo techniques and a number of second hand salesmen here in new york.
> people whose business it is to sell cameras. guess how much power they hold
> on the buying public? altho this may in no way be scientific, the seed has
> been sown.
I also saw that statement in Photo Technique. Hersay has a way of being held
as truth. There is a popular book out on collecting classic cameras. It has
the author's statement that there were underperforming designs among the OM
Zuiko's, particularily (only?) telephotos. It lacks supporting evidence. I
figued it was referencing the 135 mm lenses (now discountinued). But since
picking up a 135 mm f/3.5 MC Zuiko, I have my doubts. That author also states
that the tripod socket in (at least) the OM-1 was a weak point. Now, I would
support that statement.
Gary Reese
Las Vegas, NV
< 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 >
|