>
> Nope. What looks old and tired to pundits and non-users feels familiar
> comfortable and efficient to long time users...
Actually, I'm not overly critical of the interface other than I'm a little
bitter that the grip shape causes my wrists distress. Back in 1998-99 I
actually was extremely close to buying an EOS-3. I personally consider it to
be the best EOS body of the entire line. My only other real gripe about that
camera was the AF lights in the viewfinder would light up like a Christmas
Tree and distract the snot out of you. Compared to today's cameras, it was
not quite as refined, but was a good indication of technology to come.
Frankly, the eye-control AF was a brilliant feature--one that when it worked
well was fantastic for some things. Seeing that I can get a Zuiko to EOS
lens adaptor, who knows, I might eventually get an EOS-3 for the random
feature that it does which the OM system never had. But then again, maybe
not.
I believe that up to a point, better equipment makes for better images,
> even from the great unwashed. Does that make them better photographers?
> I dunno.
>
But, sir, this camera is not aimed at the "great unwashed". This is aimed
solely at the photographer who knows the truth, but is blinded from it by
his/her own desires.
AG
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|