--- Ken Norton <image66@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In the OM-4(ti), auto is sometimes manual,
> and manual is somewhat auto, but when auto is manual,
> auto isn't auto, nor is manual manual when auto isn't
> auto. Got that?
I've always wondered how the OM-4Ti worked.
Personally I have an OM-2S which suits me very well as its operation is pretty
simple - either spot/manual (which I use a fair amount) or aperture priority (a
lot of the time) or program (when I hand it to the wife). I find the more I
have to think about operating the camera the less attention I can pay to
composition of the picture, lighting, contrast etc. Even then I seem to forget
some essential item in so many pictures!
If, as has been reported, the 2s shares many body parts with the 4 and offers
facilities pretty close to the 4, why does it appear to be so disproportionally
cheaper then a 4? Is it a street cred thing or do they tend to be older and/or
more unreliable?
=====
Mike Blayney, Devon, UK.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - Buy the things you want at great prices.
http://auctions.yahoo.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 >
|