Thanks for all the replies. I'm certainly going to try it out. I know
that the slow zooms are not optimal, but I don't need the suggestion of
buying four lenses for a second camera! I was hoping to be told that
I'd get amazingly good money for it and go any by another couple of
zuikos. Seriously, Jim, I'm surprised at the AF performance even with
the slower zooms. Just can't get used to having nothing to adjust other
than the focal length though. How do you get the damn camera to do what
you think it should be? It's tempting just to keep for children
frenetic motion photography, but as I've mentioned in an off list
reply, the *best* series of children photos I've seen have been taken
with a 8x10 view camera. Anyone know the book Immediate Family by Sally
Mann?
James
On 20 Mar 2004, at 05:08, Jim Brokaw wrote:
> on 3/19/04 6:26 AM, James Royall at james@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Sorry for the non Olympus post, but I thought someone on the list
>> could
>> give me an unbiased opinion. Ha, who am I kidding? ;)
>>
>> In Jan my father in law handed me his 35mm kit having gone to digital
>> P&S. It's the body in the message subject with Mi*olta 35-80 4.5/5.6
>> and 80-200 4.5/5.6, a Tokina 20-35 3.5/4.5 and a manual focus Kalimar
>> 500mm mirror which takes some kind of adaptall style mount. Also a
>> Mi*olta flash unit.
>>
>> I just haven't had the desire to pick it up, learn the controls and
>> try
>> it out - everything's plastic and while the lenses are quite compact
>> the body is massive. I haven't had much opportunity to take any photos
>> since Jan, but there's been no question of not taking the OM when I
>> have. The one time that I could see it being useful (aside from the
>> 20mm instead of the 24mm zuiko) is having AF to take fast moving
>> children at play.
>>
>> Is the camera / lenses any good? Or should I just get whatever small
>> amount of money I'm able to now selling it?
>>
>> Any thoughts are welcome.
>>
>> James
>
> James - I got one of these a while back, and its quite a good camera
> for
> what it is... Minolta was first to the autofocus game, and though I
> think
> Canon has surpassed them now, they still are pretty good. The 7000i is
> a
> couple generations in and therefore refined somewhat from the very
> first AF
> designs. One thing that really helps AF performance is faster lenses; I
> notice that you have the (typical AF kit) slower zooms. I'd ditch the
> 35-80
> in favor of a 50/1.7 (probably available very cheaply and a good lens)
> and
> then maybe something in the 85/2.0 or 90/2.8 focal length range. Get a
> 135/2.8 and a 200/3.5 and dump the 80-200/4.5-5.6, and you have a nice
> AF
> kit for use in sports, kid pictures, pets, and other fast-moving
> situations.
>
> While large and plasticky, the camera body has a pretty ergonomic
> layout,
> and the controls are much less complicated than the typical digital
> camera... faint praise I know, but I think you will find it handles
> pretty
> well and yields good images. I'm not getting rid of my OM's or
> anything, but
> I ran a couple rolls of film through and decided to keep the 7000i.
> --
>
> Jim Brokaw
> OM-'s of all sorts, and no OM-oney...
>
>
>
>
>
> 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"
|