At 8:09 PM -0400 9/4/99, Harrisons wrote:
>All retail stores I have been to claim that the OM2000 is a beginner's
>camera, not to be considered seriously. From my standpoint it may be worth
>the extra cost to enjoy a piece of precision machinery, even if all else is
>equal. From a picture taking standpoint, I have not exceeded the
>composition qualities I made 30 years ago with a Praktica FX3, came close,
>but not exceeded. Physical quality of modern images, of course, is much
>better.
>
Another case of "polishing the nut behind the lens". In other words, it's
the visualization of the person taking the picture that counts, not
necessarily the equipment. I just wish I had more shots that I could be
really proud of, but I don't.
My wife is a n*k*n person, and I just bought her a FM10 on sale. It's
similar to the OM2000, but I think the OM2000 has better metering. The FM10
has a plastic body, which the OM2000 probably does also. The OM2000 was on
sale at the same price (239$ with a 35-70 zoom). The FM10 is extremely
light weight. I don't know how rugged, it is, but light weight is important
to my wife. I'm not afraid of plastics anymore, they can be very good, and
you'd would swear that the FM10 was made from some high spec exotic alloy
just from looking at it.
Be seeing you.
Dirk Wright
< 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 >
|