At 07:53 AM 5/16/99 -0700, George you wrote:
>
>I got my issue yesterday. The article is by Keppler.
snip
>
>**Now**, conspiracy theorists, listen up! At one point he lists **all**
>the current SLRs which have MLU. I won't list 'em here, but suffice to
>say most every mfg'er has at least one. Except Olympus. Now, here's the
>strange part: Next paragraph reads: "The Maxxum 9 and Pentax PZ-1p MLU
>systems are different from the others. Instead of locking up the mirror
>manually,..., the **self-timer** is used to lock up the mirror about 2
>seconds before the exposure. ... I like (this system)...."
>
>Now, my conspiracy question should be obvious: Why are the 4Ti and 3Ti
>not included in his list? Their self-timers do the same thing, albeit
>12 seconds before exposure. Why did he single out Oly for criticism in
>the article. (The point of comparing the -1 to the -4T was to see if
>Oly's engineers had been truthful when they told him the mirror damping
>on the 2-4 was so good that they didn't need MLU.)
>
Hi George,
Wasn't someone saying just the other day that Keppler has been very
friendly to Olympus in the past? How could he not know about the timer
pre-fire feature which has been on Olympus electronic models since the
OM-2S? (That's a rhetorical question ... What's the correct smiley for
exasperation?)
Maybe what Keppler likes is the very short wait between timer/pre-fire/MLU
and actual firing. I certainly wish there was a way to shorten the wait on
the OM-2S. It's really too long to be quite the moral equivalent of OM-1
MLU. There is simply too much that can happen in 12 seconds -- I think of
flowers dancing in the breeze -- and it's almost always bad.
Joel Wilcox
Iowa City, Iowa USA
< 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 >
|