ML Archiv: RE: [OM] Age Data was Non-OM, Non-NG

Olympus-OM

RE: [OM] Age Data was Non-OM, Non-NG

from Harridge, Wayne

Subject:	RE: [OM] Age Data was Non-OM, Non-NG
From:	"Harridge, Wayne" <Wayne.Harridge@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date:	Mon, 24 May 1999 21:22:00 +0800

I'm 47.

I started reading reviews of the OM-1 in the early 70's, and I don't think I
saw 1 bad review.  After handling an OM-1 at a camera shop, I knew I had to
have one.  I got my first OM-1 with 50mm f1.8 probably in '74 while still at
university.  My next purchase was the 24mm f2.8, and on it goes.  I'm
expecting my OMs to last me for the rest of my life - I've played with a few
"modern" cameras owned by friends but can't see myself using one.  I
consider it a real privilege to have found this "support group" for my
affliction.

Wayne Harridge
Ivanhoe, Victoria, Australia
http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Louvre/6152/ 

< 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>
RE: [OM] Age Data was Non-OM, Non-NG, (continued) RE: [OM] Age Data was Non-OM, Non-NG, Skip Williams RE: [OM] Age Data was Non-OM, Non-NG, Jim Loudon Re: [OM] Age Data was Non-OM, Non-NG, dhurley Re: [OM] Age Data was Non-OM, Non-NG, Peter A. Klein Re: [OM] Age Data was Non-OM, Non-NG, sje Re: [OM] Age Data was Non-OM, Non-NG, Pauls0627 Re: [OM] Age Data was Non-OM, Non-NG, Terry and Tracey RE: [OM] Age Data was Non-OM, Non-NG, Chuck Norcutt Re: [OM] Age Data was Non-OM, Non-NG, John Gettis Re: [OM] Age Data was Non-OM, Non-NG, Craig H RE: [OM] Age Data was Non-OM, Non-NG, Harridge, Wayne <= Re: [OM] Age Data was Non-OM, Non-NG, M. Stephens Re: [OM] Age Data was Non-OM, Non-NG, C.H.Ling Re: [OM] Age Data was Non-OM, Non-NG, Wayne Harrison Re: [OM] Age Data was Non-OM, Non-NG, GMcGrath Re: [OM] Age Data was Non-OM, Non-NG, Glen Lowry Re: [OM] Age data was Non-OM, Non-NG, c.e. packard Re: [OM] Age data was Non-OM, Non-NG, Giles Re: [OM] Age data was Non-OM, Non-NG, c.e. packard Re: [OM] Age data was Non-OM, Non-NG, Keith (R.K.) Berry

Previous by Date:	Re: [OM] Zuiko 35-70/4 or 35-70/3.6, C.H.Ling
Next by Date:	Re: [OM] Age Data was Non-OM, Non-NG, M. Stephens
Previous by Thread:	Re: [OM] Age Data was Non-OM, Non-NG, Craig H
Next by Thread:	Re: [OM] Age Data was Non-OM, Non-NG, M. Stephens
Indexes:	[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]