Keith R.K. Berry wrote:
>>P.S. I also love the various Pen's, XA's, and Oly 35mm R/F's.
>
>
>But did you come across them before or after you got used to the
>size of the OMs?
Well, my first OM camera was the OM-2n. Beforehand, I had a
Canon Canonet QL17 G-III rangefinder, which is a little smaller
(and lighter?) than an OM body, but not by much. Btw, many of
the Oly R/F's are full-size, comparable in size to an OM body
(e.g. Ace, 35SP, 35LC, 35LE, Auto-Eye, etc.)
Giles Stewart wrote:
>> For FTL users, the question of lens mount compatibility is
>> paramount (Oops, this sounds like the geekiest kind of poetry!
>> Sooooo soooorry... :-)).
>
>I think the term you are looking for is pun ;-)
Hmm, not really: in my "poetry" comment I was referring to the
unfortunate rhyme between "mount" and "paramount", although the
latter was IMHO the correct term for the sentiment I was trying
to convey.
>A lashing offence?
Oh, absolutely! In fact, I have already administered 15 lashes
to my bum with an M.Grip Cord 2. :-) :-)
To all my dear Zuiks/Zuikettes and their loved ones -- Season's
Greetings, and best wishes for a happy and prosperous 1999.
/Gary Schloss.
Studio City, CA
schloss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
< 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 >
|