I have to agree, that was for me one of the major attractive features of the
OM, for precisely the reason you mention. When it came to buying one, I
could not afford more than an OM-10 in 1980 - but I did look at a Nikk*rmat
EL, which I think had the same shutter speed ring arrangement. But I didn't
look for long (and I had my fingers crossed, so it doesn't count).
--
Piers
-----Original Message-----
From: olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of R.Jackson
Sent: 03 February 2005 22:28
To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [OM] Re: E1 vs E300
Really? You liked the shutter speed up on top of the body? I always thought
that was about the clumsiest way to deal with shutter speed. It means you
pretty much have to take the camera away from your eye to mess with it.
--snip
On Feb 3, 2005, at 2:04 PM, Winsor Crosby wrote:
> I was one who hated the shutter speed dial around the lens, but
> accepted it since it allowed the camera to be smaller. Nothing is as
> beautiful as an OM, but you might be surprised how clunky it can feel
> after handling a modern camera for a while. But the ergonomics of the
> OMs are unsurpassed for the kind of camera it is.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|