Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] Olympus Vs. Other...

Subject: Re: [OM] Olympus Vs. Other...
From: gma <gma@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 08:27:14 -0700
Great testimonial, Mark.  Should be posted on the wall of every camera store
and be required reading for newbie camera purchasers.

george

Mark Dickinson wrote:

> Some thoughts/ramblings from another extreme amateur and fairly recent
> OM convert.
> My previous 'system' was a Canon EOS500 (Kiss in US?) and Canon 28-80
> and 80-200.  I loved the Canon at first and thought AF was the best
> thing since sliced bread. However, as time went on I found myself
> thinking less and less about  what I was doing and letting the camera do
> more and more. Taking manual control of an EOS still doesn't feel like
> you're actually in charge. It's also very easy to focus on the wrong
> thing and as for depth of field.....
> My main complaint, however, is with the optical quality of the lenses.
> Modern mass market SLR marketing seems to rest upon a confidence trick.
> As others on the list have recently said the quality of the lens is more
> important than the features of the body in determining the quality of
> the final output when used by someone who is actually thinking. However,
> whilst bodies have got more 'sophisticated' mass market amateur lenses
> seem to have got worse optically as they are built down to a price. To
> get Zuiko like optical quality seems to require Canon professional L
> series lenses which cost silly  money when compared with near mint
> second hand Zuikos.
> A year or so ago I bought a second hand OM 2SP and 50 1.8 and 28 2.8
> Zuikos. I subsequently added a T20 and a 135 3.5. I used the two systems
> in parallel for about a year, but the results and pleasure of use from
> the OM kit is streets ahead of the Canon. I have now (last week) sold
> the Canon stuff and used the (exact) proceeds to obtain an OM1n and a
> Zuiko 100 2.8. Unlike many others on the list I have no aspirations to
> own a huge system - I might get a 35 a 200 and a T32 if the price and
> condition were right, but I'm pretty happy with what I have. The huge
> range of OM stuff is not, therefore, a factor for me.
> So, to get to the point, advantages of the OM system:
> - Build quality and feel
> - Ergonomics - to me OMs are exactly the right size and all the controls
> are in the right place. I love the positioning of the shutter speed
> control (main reason for not getting an OM 2000).
> - Optical quality of Zuiko lenses (and speed in relation to AF zooms)
> - Price of used kit - much lower than Nikons for example particularly
> for lenses of same/similar focal length and speed - most lenses for
> general use can be pickued up for relatively little.
> - Control and use of depth of field (compared with AF)
> - Having to think about what I'm doing. Even I am cleverer (although
> much slower) than auto-exposure and AF in all but 'standard' situations
> - Spot metering on the 2SP
> - All of the above results in pleasure of use and good quality output.
> The only real disadvantage for me is that my kit (and other stuff of the
> same vintage) won't last forever and I don't think I'll ever be able to
> justify the cash required for a new 3Ti or 4Ti. If Olympus still made
> the 1n and priced it against the Nikon FM2 the only disadvantage for me
> would disappear.
>




< 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