hi gary,
you have to remember that not only does canon have a tilt shift in the FD mount
but they also have it in the EOS mount. three of them!!!! don't know their
optical
performance tho but they are there.
oly has had a lot of stumbling blocks, the OM707 and 88. some of the double
digit
OM's which frankly, i don't even bother with. i don't know if these undertakings
had an effect on the image of the OM system
francis
PCACala@xxxxxxx wrote:
> Hi Francis:
>
> You provided an interesting read.
>
> > i wonder how many buyers are lured [to Canon FD] because there
> > were tilt/shift lenses available? i don't know, it would be interesting to
> > know.
>
> I would have to say that I am. Or at least I'm holding on to one A-1 body in
> case I do. It looks like a great alternative to stopping down to diffraction
> limited f stops in landscape photography.
>
> > > > have heard that
> > > > olypmus is erratic in terms of the lens performance. they should
> > > > dispell this notion and only produce toprate lenses that nobody
> > > > can question.
>
> > > Where did you hear that and which lenses are, acording to you, not top
> > > of the notch lenses?
>
> > the issue is not whether the lenses are not top notch or not but it is the
> > perception of the buying public. the source of this information is, again,
> > photo techniques and a number of second hand salesmen here in new york.
> > people whose business it is to sell cameras. guess how much power they hold
> > on the buying public? altho this may in no way be scientific, the seed has
> > been sown.
>
> I also saw that statement in Photo Technique. Hersay has a way of being held
> as truth. There is a popular book out on collecting classic cameras. It has
> the author's statement that there were underperforming designs among the OM
> Zuiko's, particularily (only?) telephotos. It lacks supporting evidence. I
> figued it was referencing the 135 mm lenses (now discountinued). But since
> picking up a 135 mm f/3.5 MC Zuiko, I have my doubts. That author also states
> that the tripod socket in (at least) the OM-1 was a weak point. Now, I would
> support that statement.
>
> Gary Reese
> Las Vegas, NV
>
> < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
> < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
> < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|