>This got me curious, so I set up a little test. Using a bellows at maximum
>extension, 80mm macro lens and two T-32's, I focused on a 18 0rey card. I
>positioned the flashes at 45 degree angles to the card thirty cm (twelve
>inches) away, set to full control by the OM. Then, stop by stop from f/4
to
>f/22, I made an exposure and watched the ready light. In both cases, OM-2n
>and OM-4T, the ready light blinked, indicating correct exposure. The only
>observed difference is the strength of the ready light's response. In the
>OM-4T, the light blinked quickly, the OM-2n blinked much more slowly, and
>fewer times, from f/11 thru f/22. The images are identical from both
>cameras. At least for my two, there is no significant difference. Other's
>mileage may vary.
>
>John P
>
On an actual subject that occupied a much smaller area using one T-32, I had
the opposite results with an OM-4 vs OM-2N. In my case, the OM-4 would not
blink from f/11 to f/22. This brings about several questions. Is the OM-4
identical to the OM-4T in this respect? Can the OM-2N pick up a smaller
subject better? Do individual cameras vary? I know MY OM-4 was terrible. As
the OM-4 was of no advantage over the OM-2N for my use, I sold it and
switched to an OM-2N.
Doug
############################################################
| This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List
| To receive the Digest version send mail to: listserv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| with "subscribe olympus-digest" in the message body.
| To unsubscribe from the current list send a message to
| listserv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx with "unsubscribe olympus" in the body.
| For questions email: owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| htttp://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html
############################################################
|