[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] Re: Why Oly is in a hole

Subject: Re: [OM] Re: Why Oly is in a hole
From: "Paul D. Farrar" <farrar@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 1998 20:39:43 -0500
At 09:30 PM 7/13/98 +0000, you wrote:
>I don't see that an optical adapter is a necessity.  I have a 
>Rolliecord TLR which is medium format but there is an adapter 
>kit for it called the Rolliekin (sp?) which will convert it to allow 
>35mm film to be used.  There is no optical converter, just a 
>plastic mask which fits in the viewfinder and cuts down the area 

That's the problem. By cutting a bit out of the center of the frame you
reduce the angle of view and lose all of your wide angle lenses in the
process. Your precious 18mm becomes the equivalent of a 40mm! That's why
some digital backs have wide angle converters built in.

Speaking of losing wide angles --  is there anything as ridiculous as the
current  "arms race" to see who can put the longest focal length on a P&S?
You're getting things like 55-200mm P&Ses with f/11 or f/12 on the longer
end. Make a P&S that can't take the pictures P&Ses are best suited for!
Olympus is largely bucking the trend, and just introduced a potentially
useful 28-80.

>The same principal could be applied to OMs by including with a 
>digital back,h a special screen with the smaller picture area 
>delineated on it as per the spot metering circle on some screens.

Paul Farrar

< 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 >

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz