Wayne,
Here's what I remember from when I had one. Here are the responses:
to #1. The manual says all except some of the macro lens.
to #2. No, but it is surprisingly good (Gary used mine to do his test,
I believe)
to #3. The finish seems fine, mostly plastic. The feel is not bad, not
OM feel but not bad. The mechanics are different but seem satisfactory
(really, only time will tell-see me in 20 years and ask again)
A poor man's OM3 is an OM1 or OM1n and they are of a different class.
There is a place for and use for the 2000 and it is making many people
happy.
You are really asking the wrong group of people to get any answers
that stray much more from the OM centerline than mine have here.
IMHO,
Rand E.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Wayne wrote:
>
> Please educate me,
> 1. Does the OM 2000 use all of the OM lenses?
> 2. If so, is the 35-70 zoom bundled with the OM2000 as good as the OM
> 35-70mm f3.5-4.5?
> 3. How is the finish, mechanics and finish compared to, say, a new OM2n?
>
> And, most importantly, if all of the above are positive, would the OM
> 2000 be a "poor man's" OM3?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Wayne
>
> < 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 >
< 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 >
|