Well put Les. You must feel very strongly about this subject though. Rather
verbose post for you! :)
Jim Couch
ll.clark@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> At the risk of starting a war, I would say: not as much as you'd think.
> Unless you regularly and systematically use a tripod, lens hood, cable
> release or mirror up/timed release, glass negative carrier and apo
> enlarging lenses, you are *NOT* going to see significant differences
> between *any* of your 30-year-old Zuiko lenses and anything else that
> is, or will be, available for the 35 mm market.
>
> In fact, if you ordinarily confine yourself to 4 x 6 or even 8 x 10
> prints, the Zuiko's are probably overkill. Anyone who has gone through
> the exercise of trying to guess from the result -- the picture, either
> on paper or on screen -- which photograph was made with [insert
> whatever you please for make] and a Zuiko on an OM-x[x], will have to
> concur. I would say that most of the discussions I hear on the photo
> newsgroups, or hear at concours of photographic enthusiasts, can be
> considered based on clever marketing by the photo companies. Take away
> the fakery, insist on results, and things become as clear as they are
> in, say, scientific environments, when results count and marketing has
> little sway [I didn't say "none," just "little" <grin>].
>
> ---------------------------------------------
> les clark / edgewater, nj / usa
> ---------------------------------------------
< 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 >
|