Olympus-OM

RE: [OM] IS 3 best for?

from Timpe, Jim

Subject:	RE: [OM] IS 3 best for?
From:	"Timpe, Jim" <Jim.Timpe@xxxxxxxxx>
Date:	Wed, 23 Jan 2002 12:11:27 -0800

Too much information??

-----Original Message-----
From: AG Schnozz 

 There are times where I must really work to get around
the limitations of my equipment.

< 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 >

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
[OM] IS 3 best for?, Clemente Colayco Re: [OM] IS 3 best for?, AG Schnozz Re: [OM] IS 3 best for?, Winsor Crosby Re: [OM] IS 3 best for?, AG Schnozz Re: [OM] IS 3 best for?, ll . clark RE: [OM] IS 3 best for?, Timpe, Jim <= RE: [OM] IS 3 best for?, AG Schnozz RE: [OM] IS 3 best for?, Timpe, Jim RE: [OM] IS 3 best for?, AG Schnozz Re: [OM] IS 3 best for?, Peter Dixon

Previous by Date:	[OM] My photo "albums", Brian Swale
Next by Date:	[OM] eBay Seller keyspy@xxxxxxx - was 35mm f2 lens - was This guy can't get anything right, Jon Wichman
Previous by Thread:	Re: [OM] IS 3 best for?, ll . clark
Next by Thread:	RE: [OM] IS 3 best for?, AG Schnozz
Indexes:	[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]