Hi All, Dan,
I think I have to agree w/Dan to a certain degree here, I've posted
before on the 2k and while not explicitly recommending against it, I did
point out (implicitly) that while I *like the 2k, I *love* the -1. The
2k is perfectly fine for beginners, (so is the -1) but it doesn't *feel*
like an OM-1~4(t). At least it will take Zuiko lenses and perhaps if a
newbie invests in a few will move on to one of the more politically
correct OM bodies that are out there. I have a 2k and I really like the
fact that it *only*? has spot metering.
The -4(t) is faster, but if you use your brain you can use the 2k's spot
meter on several subjects, see what the various f-stop/speed combinations
are and do the little mental adjustments and come out with what *you*
want the exposure to be. No it won't average out multi-spot readings (it
don't do that) but *YOU* can.
I like it. I have one. I also have the -1. The -1 *feels* better to me.
'nuff said.
Bill >; )
"Life unfolds on a great sheet called Time (film)*,
and once finished (developed)* is gone(here)* forever..."
*provided you have a good archival system in place...
On Tue, 15 Dec 1998 19:57:04 -0800 (PST) Dan Lau <dlau@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
writes:
>Recently I've noticed on the rec.photo.* lists queries about the
>Olympus OM2000, in the form of "I'm thinking about buying the
>OM2000, what do you think...". I've also noticed many (most?) of
>the replies are of the form "(For the same money,) I'd recommend
>getting a used OM-1 instead". I think some of the people who
>responded are even on this list. And this got me thinking:
>
>Is recommending against the OM2000 the right thing to do?
>Especially from the Zuikoholics (who want to see the OM* product
>line continue) to someone who is just getting into the SLR realm.
>
>Here's my concern: If the people who read the recommendations act
>as suggested and not buy the OM2000 but buy a used OM-1 instead,
>then Olympus will obviously not make any money. Therefore the
>OM2000 will be a failure. Therefore Olympus will come to the
>conclusion that there is no longer any demand for their OM*
>products. Therefore the sooner Olympus will get out of the SLR
>business.
>
>I understand what the people are saying, and for those of us on
>the list, we know exactly what the tradeoffs are between the OM*
>camera bodies and the OM2000. But we already own OM* bodies.
>
>On the other hand, for these newbies who do not have any camera
>gear to begin with and they want to get into SLR photography, is
>the OM2000 so bad of a camera that it should be avoided? Will
>giving the OM2000 a "bad name" also affect the image of the OM*
>product line? In other words, if readers get the impression that
>the OM2000 is not worth getting but they still want a new camera
>with the same features, they may end up with a Nikon. In that
>case, have we done Olympus (and ourselves) a dis-service?
>
>So of all people, should we be recommending the OM2000 when a
>newbie asks the question or should we recommend AGAINST the OM2000
>and suggest a used OM-1 instead? Should we act as "evangelists"
>for the OM system in general and make sure that Olympus is
>successful with their SLR products and continue to develop new
>products for it.
>
>I am not trying to step on any toes of anyone on this list, but
>just want to see what others think about this. Please excuse me
>if you are offended by this a non-technical OM topic.
> -Dan
>
>< 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 >
>
>
___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
< 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 >
|