Yo,
on Mon, 19 Feb 2001 10:48:57 -0700, Chris O'Neill wrote:
>P.S. Just a quick comment 'bout the OM-10... It's a WONDERFUL
>little camera, and doesn't deserve to be put-down! My first OM was the
>10, and it has provided me with many wonderful years of service. Even
>though I now mostly use the OM-2, I still take my faithful OM-10 "out for
>a spin" once in awhile, just to remember how nice it is. In fact, I'll be
I'll second this. My first OM was a 10, too (bought used in '88), and it
still holds a place of honor among my in the meantime 7 bodies (besides the
10, a PC, a 2n, a 2, an F, a 1, and a 4, in the order of acquisition). When
it developed a flash sync problem a few years ago I did not want to part
with it after all it had been through with me, so (although it would have
been cheaper to get a "new" used one) it received a special treatment by Dr.
John (who also found out it is one of the later samples with the new modular
shutter, so it's apparently better than most) and has been working
flawlessly ever since (though I use the 2 and the 2n the most, which I find
work best for my photography). When the 10 and the PC were my only SLRs, I
always preferred using the 10, which I found is also quite good on long time
night exposures (which are outside its official specs), one of my favorite
types of photography, though not as good as the 2 and the 2n.
MtFbwy,
Volkhart
--
Volkhart Baumgaertner email: kyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
MausNet: @MGN
< 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 >
|