At 05:16 PM 5/5/99 +0200, Ingemar you wrote:
>
>Another interesting question is *why* this movement appears. Is it only the
>OM-1(N) or is it for other OM cameras as well? The result of yours, says that
>there is more movement (it should be called "vibration" instead, should it
not?)
>for the OM-1(N) than for the OM-2S. Now, if this is a valid result, one
have to
>wonder about the difference in construction of these two. What are the
>construction differences really? Are there any other OMs that will behave the
>same way? How about the OM2000? Its shutter is vertical, all others are
>horizontal. Can therefore the OM2000 be better, or perhaps even worse?
>
Hi Ingemar,
The conservative hypothesis is that OM-1's with 200/f4 have inordinant
vibration (and seem to need a little extra support for that reason).
The *fear* is that an OM-1(x) with *any* lens is more prone to the effects
of shutter vibration than other cameras. Unfortunately, I don't yet know a
good way to test this. The length of the 200/f4 makes it easy to secure a
laser pointer to it.
My experience is more important to me than these tests, however. Going into
the tests I knew that there was some sort of a problem with the 200/f4 lens
because it hadn't always been easy to get consistently acceptable results.
I feel like I'm closer to understanding why and more importantly knowing
what to do about it. But in general I have lots of evidence that the OM-1
takes very good pictures. There can be no doubt about this.
I'll continue to use the OM-1 confidently with shorter lenses and handheld
and use a good tripod, including lens support, wherever I can.
Joel
< 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 >
|