If you compare the bottom wind & shutter mech in the 2000 with a
Nikkormat , you'll know where its' roots lay.
It's as if Nikon wanted a inexpensive body made for them by someone else
and they said, "Here's our design, run with it."
The bottom mech is a dead ringer for a 25 year old Nikon design.
Just my opinion.
John
Dave Haynie wrote:
>
> On Thu, 25 Feb 1999 19:12:19 EST, ClassicVW@xxxxxxx jammed all night, and by
> sunrise was overheard remarking:
>
> > In a message dated 2/25/99 6:24:20 PM EST, packardc@xxxxxxxxx writes:
>
> > << In reference to (IRT) the OM-2000, I was under the impression that it
> > was designed by Olympus, but manufactured by Cosina.
> > >>
>
> > I've heard that Olympus *designed* it, or they dictated the "specs" or did
> > they just name what features they wanted it to have? I don't know if anyone
> > knows for sure.
>
> I believe the basic OM-2000 body is the same one Cosina uses for OEMed
> models they make for Nikon, Canon, Vivitar, Yashica, and others.
>
> In a traditional OEM deal, you approach your OEM manufacturer with a
> specification for what you want. There may be some give an take, or it
> may be a slam-dunk based entirely on an existing model. It's pretty much
> up to the manufacturer how they meet your specs -- it could involve
> sharing technology (when I was at Commodore Computer, we always OEMed our
> monitors -- sometimes it was demanding custom casework, or analog RBG in
> the days before VGA when everyone else ran 4-bit digital graphics, other
> times something as simple as added a "right" speaker to go with the
> "left" one standard in their existing unit).
>
> It looks, based on the feature set of the other cameras reportedly based
> on the same Cosina body (http://www.neci.nj.nec.com/homepages/sebastien/album
> /clone2000.html)
> that Olympus was fairly aggressive in getting the features they wanted,
> such as spot metering, as long as it dropped nicely enough into the
> design. Where Olympus would certainly have done things differently, such
> as in the shutter speed control (an OM camera with the speed control on
> top deck? Gimme a break, this is sacrilige), lack of compatibility with
> winders (something even the OM-10 does right), non-interchangable
> focusing screen, These functions would have impacted quite a bit on the
> existing camera design, so they were not done.
>
> --
> Dave Haynie | V.P. Technology, Met@box Infonet, AG | http://www.metabox.de
> Be Dev #2024 | NB851 Powered! | Amiga 2000, 3000, 4000, PIOS One
>
> < 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 >
< 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 >
|