Hi all,
has anyone seen the following excerpt from Galen Rowell's Outdoor
Photographer column? The full article is available at
http://www.mountainlight.com/articles/op296.html
reminds me of something I read in a book about sports photography that
recommended against Olympus OM because of their questionable durability. I
think I was somewhat affected by such a statement. Went into my
subconscious a long time ago.
--Adi
excerpt:
"This latter point helps answer an oft-asked question. If weight is so
important to me in the wilds, why do I carry a Nikon N90s or F4 instead of
a featherweight Canon Rebel X or Olympus OM-4? Because to have confidence
that I can bring back the goods for myself or on a professional assignment
I don't need to bring two of them.Of course I take an extra camera body on
any long overseas trip, but on shorter,particapatory adventures where
weight really counts- day trips near home or side excursions during exotic
journeys- I want to carry just one camera I can trust.
After more than fifty foreign expeditions to the world's most remote
regions, I have yet to have a problem significant enough to stop a Nikon
N90 or F4 from giving me well-exposed pictures, while I have yet to lead a
foreign photo trek where some other type of SLR didn't expire in the hands
of a grief-stricken participant. I've seen many Olympus obituaries, a
smattering of lower - end Nikon and Canon casualities, but virtually no
full mortalities in top- end pro cameras. There must be exceptions
that some readers will undoubtedly feel compelled to relate, but not enough
to disprove the general rule that pro cameras give pros the dependability
they pay for. "
< 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 >
|