Hi Chris, Andrew and all,
From: Chris Crawford <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Leicas are good cameras, but having and using both a Leica and the OM
>system, I can say that there's nothing magic about either. They're good
>systems and they produce good results. I find each has certain strengths.
Absolutely.
>Leicas (like all RFs) are not suited to long lenses and close focus
>ability is limited.
Certainly, but with digital sensors on EVIL cameras, these limitations are
over, we get the best of both worlds -- there's little excuse today for
SLRs!
>Wide angles can be used, and actually focus more
>accurately than on an SLR
Too accurately, I'd say. I think I lose too much time nailing focus on the
Bessa-T with the 21/4...
>but you need an accessory viewfinder if the lens
>is wider than your camera's finder
And then there is the Bessa R4A / R4M, covering up to 21mm lenses!
Wider lenses need to use the accessory viewfinder, but then they work fine
with hyperfocal / scale focusing, so there's no need to switch the eye
between the RF and the VF -- not that it's that bad, though.
It may not be the most convenient way, but I do prefer rangefinders for
wide-angle lenses. First of all, without the need to rely on retrofocus
design, the lenses themselves are better -- not necessarily sharper or
faster, and the lack of distortion may have a tradeoff of light fall-off
(none of them are critical issues to me) but they are SMALLER.
>The Leica is best for candid work. The shutter fires instantly, allowing
>capture of fleeting moments that I usually lost when trying to do that kind
>of work with the OM-4T.
Yes... I'd like to build myself a device for measuring the shutter lag of
cameras -- I have no doubt about the light sensor on the back of the
shutter, and the timing device, but I don't know how to start counting, or
detect the finger on the button...
>The OM is bad in that regard even by SLR standards.
>Its shutter lag is enormous Compared to many other SLRs, like my Nikon F4.
??? I had a brief experience with the F4, so I can't tell for sure, but I
don't think the OMs are bad by SLR standards... quite the opposite: a decade
ago a had _just_ two (manual focus) SLR cameras, the OM-4 and the Contax
Aria -- I sold the later because it was painfully slow!
OTOH, I have read somewhare that the SLR with the shorter shutter lag is the
Contax S2 (about 30ms) with the amazing Contax RTS folowing short. The OM-1
was at about 39ms, IIRC, and the "regular" OM-2 more or less the same. But
I've heard about times around 100ms for "modern" SLRs... I know of other
classic cameras with noticeable delayed shutter action, like the Miolta XD
series -- and their derivatives, the Leica R4 / R5.
But I think the OM-4 series, with the extra mirror inside, are somewhat
slower than the classic OM-1/1n/2/2n. And the OM-2S is definitely _much_
slower because of their special aperture actuator lever -- see how they
reach 3.5 fps only, versus a 5 fps motor-driven classic OM.
However, that sluggish action means less shock/vibration also.
From: Andrew Fildes <afildes@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>M6? No, anything after the original M4 is just not the same...
That's what I heard... after the M5 fiasco, the company of the Red Dot had
to "resurrect" with the "updated" M4-2, later M4P and then the M6 with, oh,
built-in light meter -- but with cheaper RF construction, said to be more
flare prone.
I eventually succumbed to the simplicity of the M2.. also less expensive
than most M4's out there!
<http://www.flickr.com/photos/zuiko21/4387962495/> :-)
Cheers,
--
Carlos J. Santisteban Salinas
IES Turaniana (Roquetas de Mar, Almeria)
<http://cjss.sytes.net/>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|