"The F280 is already an auto-exposure flash, which works well in my
experience (the used time must be shorter than 1/60!)."
Uh-uh. Nope. The F280 is only automatic in X synch. In SuperFP, its
output is fixed. (If I'm wrong about this, I'd like to know just HOW it
works, because it is fundamentally "impossible." Would someone correct
me if I'm wrong?)
>>>>>
When I originally wrote that we should sue Olympus if they refuse to
promise parts and service for at least a decade after the
(presumably-eventual-but-not-certain) demise of the OM system, I almost
deleted the suggestion before mailing. After all, what would the legal
argument be for holding Olympus responsible?
In fact, there is no such argument. Unfortunately, companies are free to
do pretty much do what they like, and there isn't much consumers can do
about it.
However, I cannot believe some of you are suggesting that we simply lie
down and roll over. I am also surprised that some people think that
buying a product buys nothing _but_ the product -- and if you buy the
"wrong" product, well, tough.
I could draw parallels with Betamax and the Macintosh (the relative
"failures" of both products being due almost wholly to their
manufacturers' failures to market and/or license them properly), but I
won't. Instead, consider this.
The OM system is a _system_, aimed at advanced amateurs and
professionals. Like other system cameras, it has a wide (and hopefully
growing) range of accessories that allow it to be used for a lot more
than "family snapshots."
Anyone buying into such a system should reasonably expect that camera
bodies, lenses, accessories -- and service! -- will be available for a
long enough time to let them put together the system they want or need.
We (and I mean most of the people on this group) have substantial
investments in elaborate photo systems -- not just a camera and two or
three lenses we can "dump" and replace.
How many times do I have to repeat that the OM's decline is Olympus's
fault? THEY are the ones who "created" the decline in demand by not
advertising, not promoting, and not "improving" the system. Why are WE
-- the loyal OM owners who supported the system -- supposed to sit back
and blame _ourselves_ if we can't get parts or service? It's not our
fault -- we BOUGHT the camera, lenses, and accessories. And Olympus --
_any_ company, for that matter -- owes us more than just the right to
possess the hardware.
When Olympus introduced the OM _system_, they made an implicit
commitment to keep the system going. We therefore have the right to
insist that, should the system be discontinued, Olympus continues to
provide parts and service consistent with A: the long life of a system
camera expected by its owners and B: the practical truth that most
cameras have a surprisingly long working life (ie, most cameras do not
quickly wear out).
Businesses exist to provide consumers with what they want -- they have
no "right" to be in business, or make a profit, otherwise. Companies
that feel differently are companies I don't want to do business with.
Now -- what do you people think would be a sensible, intelligent,
non-threatening way to approach Olympus on this matter? (We can always
sue later. <grin>) I'm listening.
< 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 >
|