: How many of this "big group of potential buyers" have rushed to buy
: an OM3T(up to $1600 in the latest B&H catalog) or 35-80/2.8? Maybe 2
: or 3 percent of OM users?
The OM-3Ti is a very expensive camera for what it has to offer. The only
extra (but unique) feature it has compared to other models is enhanced
TTL/OTF flash in the 1-1/60s range with fill-in control.
The OM3Ti is priced $400 less than a Leica R6-2 which offers about
the same thing. It all depends on what you compare it to.
Hardly something
most OM users can justify to themselves (and to their spouses). Olympus
would have made a better marketing move if it had released the 'definite OM
body' that Maitani had planned (as he told in an interview).
However a digital body that accepts both Zuiko lenses and dedicated digital
AF lenses is a different story in terms of new features you get for your
money. Besides digital bodies pay for themselves because you save the film
and processing costs. If you shoot a lot a digital body pays itself back
within a year, especially if you use professional film with professional
processing, if it's in the same price range as the 3Ti.
Let me hear the top ten reasons why you would *not* buy a digital OM if
Olympus ever releases it.
hnz
1. I would not want to spend a lot of money for the lower quality
available now.
2. Even when CCDs get up to the 9 or 10 megapixels that are
apparently needed to equal the quality of today's film a digital
camera is not such a good deal. If the OM3T is being sold for $1600
and judging from the cost of CCD cameras in general compared to film
cameras a digital OM would be about $3000. That is not counting the
price of a bunch of the high capacity memory cards needed to store
your photos until you get home or the price of a very portable small
laptop which will add about 4 pounds to yours camera bag. I think
that a digital OM investment without a lens could be $5000 out the
door if you count all the things you need. The price hit for digital
will pay for a lot of film and processing.
3. If digital cameras continue the megapixel race past the point of
equalling film, then I may consider a digital OM, maybe with a
discounted earlier CCD so that I can afford it.
4. The situation which I might seriously consider a digital OM would
be if terrorism defense reaches the point that it is no longer
possible to travel without irreparably damaging unexposed film.
--
Winsor Crosby
Long Beach, California
< 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 >
|