> This kind of thing ticks me off.
Don't get mad. Just a gun and an SUV!
> As Lee pointed out on the list earlier the OM line of
> camera's is still pretty much State Of The Art.
So is a 1920's box camera, based on some arguments.
> So your a young kid and you don't want to drive your
> father's Olympus? What do new camera's have that old
> ones don't? Do they have better optics? No. Are they
> easier to use? No. Not if you want to control what is
> going on. Do they take better pictures? No.
Yes, I'm a young snot too embarrased to carry anything but a
shiny Can*n Elan with 35-180/5.6 image-stabilization zoom lens.
Come-on, who in their right mind would prefer a sachel full of
ancient prime lenses--some with big, heavy glass instead of an
ultralight image-stabilized zoom that covers them all? Zuiko
"primes" were good in their day, but they don't even compare to
today's optics. Bokeh is a highly overrated "cult-like"
characteristic that only exists in the minds of a few
Zuiko-zealots. How about flare-control? The latest models have
literally hundreds of layers of coatings on very exotic glass
materials. How can a single layer or two of coatings compete
with that?
Auto-modes, matrix-metering, image-stabilization, 8fps built-in
motordrives, auto-rewind, silent operation mode (even quieter
than any OM), between-frame data stamping, auto-ISO,
weather-proofing, auto-focus, and last, but not least--aperture
settings in the viewfinder!
Oh, the embarrasement. OM users need to start going
"underground". I don't know how I'd manage showing up at school
events for my daughter with an OM tucked under my arm. Please,
will somebody give me a digital camera so I can fit in better?
AG-(not your father's OMmobile)-Schnozz
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better
http://health.yahoo.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 >
|