For the long exposures typical of astrophotograhy, mirror lockup is
meaningless. What is more important is a mechanical shutter that doesn't
drain batteries all the time it is open. That is why an OM-1 or OM-1N is
preferred. An OM-3 or -3Ti also meets that requirement, but why spend that
much?
Gary Edwards
----- Original Message -----
From: JOHN SCHEUERER <jhs8956@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, October 28, 2000 12:59 PM
Subject: [OM] best OM for astronomy
> Hi folks,
>
> A friend of mine wants to buy a camera for use on his telescope.
>
> [1] Whats the best OM for astronomy use and are OMs the best bar none?
>
> [2] Whats the best film [professional or not] and film speed.
>
> [3] Is mirror lockup better for astronomy pics [vibrationwise] then
mirror
> prefire example OM 1 vs OM 2000 vs OM3 or 4 [ti]. I get the impression
from
> Garry's lense tests that prefire has less vibration,but with the obnoxious
> [[[ KA-KLACK ]]] shutter sound of the OM2000, I'm wondering about
> recomending it to him.???
>
> [4] What other fixtures will he need besides the camera itself and are
they
> easily available?
>
>
> Thanks in advance for your info.
> _________________________________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
>
> Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
> http://profiles.msn.com.
>
>
> < 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 >
|