I never had any problems with my OM2SP, so it wasn't the reliability
that made me choose the 2n over it. For me, it was the stiffness of the
advance lever, shutter speed ring and the fact that it ate batteries
(3-4 months off a set of SR44, 1-2 off a LR44). My 2n has a silky smooth
advance lever and shutter ring; when advancing on my 2SP, I had to pay
attention while winding it, instead of a quick thumb movement with my
2n. The shutter speed ring was a similar story.
That being said, I liked the 2SP for the spotmeter and the 2-series
screens. Oh, and I loved the LCD meter, especially the illumination
button.
In regards to the brighter screen, I think you're probably right that
the viewfinder brightness is slightly darker when using similar focusing
screens, however I did not notice much difference between the two. With
a 2-13 screen in the 2SP, it was noticeably brighter than my 2n + 1-13.
A 2n + 2-13 is also slightly brighter than a 2SP + 2-13. My 1-5 is still
the brightest though!
Daniel Tan
Well stated! Certainly not just sentiment. So now I wonder, why so many
others
seem NOT to like the OM2s, compared to OM2/OM4. Does anyone with
experience
care to volunteer a justification for the OM2s "nay"? Is it reliability
or
serviceability?
I have a question w.r.t. reason (2). If the 2s mirror is half-silvered,
does
it not reduce the V.F. brightness by 1 stop, which would then be
compensated
for by the 2/3 stop brighter screen, leading to a net "no difference" in
viewfinder brightness from the OM1/2?
--
Parzival Herzog
The olympus mailinglist olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: mailto:olympus-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
To contact the list admins:
mailto:olympusadmins@xxxxxxxxxx?subject="Olympus List Problem"
The olympus mailinglist olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: mailto:olympus-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
To contact the list admins: mailto:olympusadmins@xxxxxxxxxx?subject="Olympus
List Problem"
|