In a message dated 1/7/99 10:04:59 AM Eastern Standard Time,
per.nordenberg@xxxxxxxxxx writes:
<< guess the positioning of the LCD illumination window on the OM-2S/P
is one of the drawbacks on this camera. Not only because of the
possible blocking by fingers (though less risk with winder attached?)>>
Actually, I find I block the window more with th ewinder attached. Like I
said, fat fingers...
<< but also because it should have been placed a little higher so that
more light could have entered.>>
The best place is probably where the OM-3/4 has it, on the pentaprism housing.
But then I think you get back to having the LCD at the bottom of the frame.
<< As it is now one must use the LCD
illumination button quite often when working in low light, and the
batteries will suffer accordingly.>>
This could be part of the reason the OM-2S has a reputation as a battery
eater.
<<BTW, I know the shutter sound of my OM-2SP, but in what way is the
OM-4 sound different? Which is the most quiet? My guess is the
OM-2S/P. >>
Subjectively the OM-4 is quieter. In my opinion, the OM-2S makes more of a
"ker-chunk" kind of sound, compared to the OM-4's "klunk". I presume it is the
program exposure mechanism in the OM-2S that accounts for the difference. One
interesting thing I read in the old Modern Photography's review of the OM-4:
when they measured the sound level with and without the MD2, they determined
that the sound "level" was the same. The motor only increased the duration of
the sound. Is the MD2 that quiet?
Paul Schings
< 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 >
|