>
>Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2001 15:34:50 -0700 (PDT)
>From: "M. Royer" <royer007@xxxxxxxxx>
>Subject:
>
>I see an OM-2000 being offered on e-bay and was
>wondering. Does anyone have any experience with this
>Cosina made camera. If so what was that experience
>like, was it a nice camera, not so nice, total crap? I
>have an OM-1n so I'm noit going to get it but I was
>just wondering if in the future this might be one of
>those extra extra extra kind of cameras to have around
>when you want to take pics but don't want to use an
>OM-1n, 2, 3, or 4. Or would an OM-10 variant be a
>better choice. And yes I know the features of the
>OM-2000 so I don't need to go into that kind of
>discussion. Thank you for your time.
Mark,
I've had one for a while. It doesn't have the same feel as the real OMs, or
even the OM-10. The OM-10 always felt "correct" (to me) in my hand. The
OM2000 doesn't have that same feel. I also find the trick of having to move
the advance lever part way (in order to allow you to meter) to be very
annoying. I'm left eye dominant, so the lever is poking me -- something I knew
about in advance.
I got it solely because I wanted a cheap re-entry to the world of SLR
photography. My OM-10 had become unreliable years back and I had just left SLR
photography alone for about 7 years or so. I wasn't sure how much I would pick
it up again, and sticking with a low cost OM body was the inexpensive way to
find out, including re-using the lenses I had. It works fine (mostly -- see my
comments a few paragraphs down), but there is nothing special about the 2000.
If I already owned other working OM bodies, I can't think of a reason to prefer
the OM2000 over any of them. I suppose the higher shutter sync speed might be
one unique value, but I would rather have the feel and control positioning of
the OMs any day.
It might make sense as a back-up body on which warranty work can be done (I
bought an extended warranty for mine because of the Cosina reputation) but if
you've invested in the other OM bodies, I would expect you will signifcantly
prefer the "real" thing.
As for quality: Lot's of metal, so it appears somewhat sturdy. On the
downside, mine isn't 6 months old and there appears to be something amiss with
the meter. No matter what (even looking at a bright lamp) it claims
underexposure at 1sec, 1/2 sec and 1/4 sec -- so I'll be sending it in for
warranty work soon -- rather alarming. I noticed the meter was bogus at 1
second about a month after I had it, the "creeping" of the problem to the 1/2
and 1/4 second settings is very annoying and recent. Pretty silly to be
shooting something bright and while it is overexposed at 1/8 of a second it
suddenly becomes underexposed after _doubling_ the amount of light by switching
it to 1/4 second!
Since the OM2000 it can be easily found brand new for <$175 and a 7 year
extended warranty can be tacked on for < $30 more, it is pretty high on the
value equation. But it is not really an Olympus. If I continue shooting, at
some point I'm likely to want to find a nice used OM-4T and buy that, but for
now the OM2000 does what I need.
Stuart
< 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 >
|