It was written sometime back by I don't recall who:
<< Take away the spot meter and the titanium and what you would
have is a cheap shitty body with no particularly advanced features jst
like
every other entry level camera on the market. >>
Hmm...given that in the early 70s I gave up my M2 for my first OM1
(which still works flawlessly I might add) I find that to be a bit
overstated. I let it pass the first time I read it posted but it has
been quoted enough times I felt obliged to comment. A Leica from the 50s
or 60s can capture just as good an image as an EOS3n or F5...let's not
forget it is just a light-proof box with a shutter really.
It was written by me in response to a message by a guy saying that oly
should dump the titanium/multi spot metering to lower costs of
manufacturing. Please take this comment in context! Now of course the
message I posted had nothing to do with image quality, but rather with body
features and market positioning. I posted my view that Titanium and the
spot meter were 2 of the 3 things that make olympus *bodies* unique. The
3rd being their incredible size/weight. The lenses are a whole separate
issue. Of course any ody can take the same picture assuming it is light
tight and the shutter is accurate. What I was commenting on was the fact
that the only thing which differentiates an oly *body* from brands X,Y or Z
are the above features. There is of course also the ergonomic features such
as location of DOF and Shutter speeds etc, but I believe the aforementioned
features to be the primary ones.
Please read the *original* message again.
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
< 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 >
|