Yes I saw, but you know what, those people will not ship to Canada via
regular mail!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
They want $45 U.S. to send it. One list member sent me one try try and it
only cost $16 to send. I cannot figure KEH out sometimes, this has happened
to me before.
-Bill
-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Stanke [mailto:bstanke@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 5:16 PM
To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [OM] Trouble in OM paradise
Bill,
The bellows is avilable new from B&H ($279), or used from KEH ($126 for
LN-, $109 for Ex+ and $72 BGN), all with the dueal cable release.
Bill Stanke
> William Clark wrote:
>
> I think my dad's concern is just how long can a system last. This all
> started with his attempt to find a bellows. We went though 3 in our
> search and all had age problems. He doesn't want to switch just for
> the sake of switching, but to ensure that he doesn't wake up one day
> to find oil all over his aperture blades and camera not working. I
> may be over-simplifying matters, but he is asking a fundamental
> question: can we trust the OM system and lenses to be there 10 years
> from now? I think so, but it is a concern given the age it is now.
>
> -Bill Clark
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bill Stanke [mailto:bstanke@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 4:55 PM
> To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [OM] Trouble in OM paradise
>
> Winsor,
>
> I suspect that you are right about AF. It's sad that 20+ years of the
>
> camera industry's R&D have not yielded better results. I would be
> interested in George's experience with his Contax N1, since it should
> be
> the "state of the art" in AF.
>
> IMHO AF is one of the few areas where the OM system doesn't "spec out
> on
> paper" well, compared with a "Wonderbrick". A higher flash synch
> would
> be nice, as would reading the DX encoding (maybe). It is a real
> tribute
> to the genius of the original OM design that it hasn't been topped
> after
> all these years.
>
> The point I was trying to make was that if I was going to the trouble
> of
> selling my stuff/buying new stuff/learning to use the new stuff that I
>
> would want to point to some tangible improvement over what I already
> had. Trading an OM-2n for a FM3a looked more like moving sideways. A
>
> better analogy would be the move to a 645 system, where you could
> justify the effort by saying "well, it was for the bigger negative".
>
> Bill Stanke
>
> Winsor Crosby wrote:
> >
> > >Bill,
> > >
> > >I think people should do "that which makes them happy".
> > >
> > >The FM3a specs out remarkably similar to an OM-2n. The OM is
> better in
> > >some areas (low light metering) and the FM3a is better in others
> (flash
> > >synch speed, mechanical shutter on all speeds).
> > >
> > >Are N*kon lenses better? Maybe (probably). If image quality is a
> > >serious concern, then dad should be using a monopod or tripod. Or,
>
> > >upgrading to a MF outfit.
> > >
> > >If I were going to the trouble of moving to a different system, I
> would
> > >want more of an improvement, such as auto-focus.
> > >
> > >My two cents.
> > >
> > >Bill Stanke
> >
> > Many of us do not see auto-focus as a improvement. As a friend of
> > mine says of his higher priced AF Pentax, "Good enough for machine
> > prints, but not for slides." :-)
> > --
> > Winsor Crosby
> > Long Beach, California
> >
> > < 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 >
< 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 >
|