Thanks Jim. I have a Kiron 24/2 and Zuiko 85/2, but guess I'm a softy
here, middle age has led me to try to travel lighter! That's why I'm,
looking for a 28/2.8 and a lighter body. The holster pack sounds like a
good idea. Thanks, John.
On Tue, 6 Mar 2001 19:35:50 -0700 "James N. McBride" <jnmcbr@xxxxxxx>
writes:
> The OM-1 is hard to beat for backpacking. I like it with a 135mm f2.8
> and a
> 24mm f2.8 and a holster-type case that suspends from the front of
> the pack
> straps. /jnm
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of ClassicVW@xxxxxxx
> Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2001 7:09 PM
> To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [OM] How bout the OMG?
>
>
> Having owned just about every OM, (and I still have two OM-Gs), I
> like
> them
> very much, they work very well, are more reliable than it's
> cousin, the
> OM-10, BUT I wouldn't want to bang one against a rock or
> something. Much
> plastic, as you mention. Forget about it surviving a fall, IMO. I
> know no
> one
> 'plans' on dropping their camera, but unless you consider the 'G'
> 'disposable' and don't care what happens, an OM-1 would be a much
> much
> better
> choice. Hold a '-1' and a 'G' in your hands and you'll know what I
> mean.
> Regards,
> George S.
>
>
> I'm trying to put together a very light kit for backpacking. I
> see that
> the OMG is the lightest body. I'm sure there's lots of plastic.
> Just
> wondering what experience people have had with it? Thanks, John
> from
> Olympia, WA.
>
>
>
>
>^..^<
MAGGIE
LIVES!!!
________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
< 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 >
|