From: Bob Sull <w8imo@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> ...made it obvious that Frank never even looked
>through the viewfinder before buying the camera. Then he started
>beating the OM-4 up and making it seem like it was junk when he did
>look.
>
>You have to admit that, IMHO, that is an unusual way to buy something.
Not necessarily.When I bought my OM-2n after using an OM-1n for a year or so
I didn't insist on a demonstration. I expected, and got, a camera that was
more advanced yet one that could, mirror lock up apart, be switched back to
a virtual OM-1n - there wasn't much of a learning curve. If, prior to
reading Frank's post, I'd seen an OM-4 at an affordable price, I would have
expected the same kind of transition again - a camera that behaved like an
OM-2n but with some technological improvements, and my only concerns at the
dealers would be in respect of price, guarantee, etc. Becoming familiar with
its operation would be left for a leisurely session at home with the manual,
and the accompanying feelings of delight - or otherwise!
In the early '70s when I believed in the Nikon hype, I bought my dream
camera outfit, a Nikkormat FT with three Nikkors and I can clearly remember
the intense disappointment that developed over the first few weeks of its
ownership. Fortunately it was resolved by swapping it for an equivalent
Leica M2 outfit.
Regards,
Keith
keith_r.k.berry@xxxxxxxxxx
There are no 100 0mprovements.
The best you can hope for are more steps forward than back.
< 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 >
|