>
> I would imagine anybody using a 21/2.0 on, say, an OM-3Ti would be a
> very happy camper indeed, and the envy of our rangefinder brothers.
> Does anybody here use this combination? I would love to see some
> images...
>
Well, I don't have a 21/2.0, but I do regularly place the 24/2.8 and 35/2.8
on the OM-3Ti. It is most certainly a very compact and palmable combination.
Now with the 50/1.4, the 35/2.8 has temporarily taken a back seat, but only
for a short while. When I want to impress people, I'll put the 35-80/2.8 on
the motordrive equipped OM-4T. That starts to take it into whale territory.
> In fact, I would in general like to see some more OM images from you
> lot! Film images! B&W images!
>
I'm trying to do my part! That new L1 is for clients who are too cheep
and/or blind to pay for film. But once in a while I get a client who
appreciates the finer things in life. It's kinda like the difference
between "Bud Lite" and "Guinness". Both are beers and are alcohol delivery
mediums, but if you follow the analogy, digital is like "Bud Lite" in that
it is cleaner with no bitter aftertaste or bits of unfiltered grain. But
"Guinness" is the real thing with character, boldness and a multitude of
flavors to savor. If you could have only one beer for the rest of your life,
would it be "Bud Lite"?
That's the way I feel about film and digital. Both do the job, with one
being far more popular (in total sales). But if popularity (total sales) was
the determining factor in what is "best", then all beers should strive to be
like "Bud Lite".
AG (no longer a drinker, but if I did, it would be a Guinness) Schnozz
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|