At 11:52 AM 5/6/99 +0000, Giles you wrote:
>
>I defer to John Hermanson on this but I recall that he has said in the
past that one
>of the big differences between single and multiple digit OMs is the level of
>sophistication of shutter/mirror mechanisms such that the Single digit OMs
have
>special shock absorbers for the mirror and such like.
>
Hi Giles,
In the tests I was doing, I routinely used the timers so that I could get
closer to the laser-illuminated spot on the wall but have the camera about
2.5 meters away. In addition, with the OM-1 I locked up the mirror. The
timer would of course have locked up the mirror on the OM-2S. Any
differences between the OM-1 and OM-2S with 200/f4 mounted should have to
do only with the shutter and aperture stopdown mechanism, although I tried
to nullify the latter by going to full aperture and even taping down the
DOF button.
>Between the OM1 and 2s an obvious difference is that one has an all
mechanical
>shutter mechanism while the other has an electro mechanical system.
>
>Any manufacturer, that is any good, learns how to improve their products
with the
>input of experience and new ideas. Given this, it would be naive to
expect an OM1
>to be as technically refined as say a 4Ti.
>
Expectations are, well, expectations, and disappointments abound. I am
certainly coming around to your view of the superiority of the
electro-mechanical shutter, but for right now all I would hazard to say is
that extra lens support is apt to be useful with an OM-1 and 200/f4. No one
has been surprised, for instance, that Gary's tests of the 90/f2 or 50/1.2
with OM-1 indicated that these lenses are excellent. Just want to remind
everybody that these also were shot with an OM-1.
The ability to provide aperture priority exposure is also a great advantage
of the electro-mechanical shutter which would justify a manufacturer's
decision to change shutter designs. A decision could be made on this
basis, not because the mechanical shutter is inferior per se. I think you
might be drawing conclusions a little too much on the basis of assumed
"truths." The OM-3 says something about Olympus commitment to mechanical
shutters.
It's possible that if Gary re-shoots the 200/f4 tests with a different
camera the results won't be any better. All we know is that some sort of
shudder affects an *inadequately supported* OM-1 + 200/f4. We don't really
know if this affects picture quality yet.
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 >
|