Let me play at least partial devil's advocate here. I don't
so much disagree with you Albert, as think we are talking
about whether anchovies taste like sea manna or salty mud.
Please bare with my possibly apocryphal ramblings:
> Albert [mailto:olympus@xxxxxxxxxxx] wrote:
> Hmm.. I've taken a look at some of the newer cameras, and I
> swear, the people who designed the cameras are the same people
> who design Monster trucks. "Bigger is better" mentality.
> It really annoys me.
I have a Canon EOS 50E with battery-pack. It's "bigger". The
battery pack not only gives access to AA batteries (which are
compensated for in the OM1 by a non-requirement), but also a
vertical/ portrait format shutter release. Now the size is a
disadvantage for carrying sometimes, but for handholding, it is
*very* comfortable and feels much more stable inhand than the OM,
without the battery-back itself, or any P&S I've ever used. Size
does have it's benefits (plus, there's this little "lip" on the
bottom of the battery pack that, when carrying the camera in
your hands and not around your neck, makes it easy to carry
with less fear of dropping).
> My friend just told me he went to a camera store, and saw some
> of the new Canon's and he was torquing the body, and the store
> sales guy freaked out when he saw how much the body torqued!
"Torquing" can be a strength though - just look at plain wings ;)
However, more to the point, I don't often need such rigidity in
the body of a camera I use. Plastic can no doubt be a weakness,
but I think any weakness is often overemphasised for the great
majority who don't use their cameras to hammer nails or fend off
guerilla bullets.
> Also, there is a million functions, which probably will never get
> used...
...but they might. I use eye-control for DOF-check, though less so
for the focus. The auto-exposure-bracketing is a simple convenience.
I leave the film leader out with a custom function. I turn that
irritating in-focus beeping off. I rewind silently rather than
quickly. I *don't* switch the function of a couple of the buttons.
I *don't* use multi-exposure (or at least haven't yet). The two
wheels (one just in front of the shutter-release, and one larger
one in the middle of the back right under your thumb) are
amazingly intuitive to use for adjusting shutter-speed, aperture,
compensation (depending on "mode" you are in).
USM focussing (though a product of the lens rather than body) makes
a helluva difference to this poor manual focusser when shooting
with my longish zoom (100-300) my clubs softball or touch-footy.
Now, that may be a lacking in my eye-ability (I'm short-sighted
and have uncoordinated "winking" ability - both eyes want to close
<grin>), but it's compensated for in ability and speed by USM
autofocus (though I turn eye-control off - it's even quicker
that way). It makes me take better photos in these circumstances,
or rather, permits me to take these photos without being
hindered or blocked by a frustrating handicap (I'd struggled
with longer lense manual focussing before, which put me off
for a while. AF let me back into this game).
It's a fault/lacking of mine, not everyone, but that's who I'm
buying a camera for.
Now I know none of these are a requirement of a camera as
"light-tight box" or are available in a more manual form in non-
electrobrick cameras, but they are a convenience. Unnecessary
convenience perhaps, but convenient nevertheless, like many of
the functions and abilities undoubtedly on the latest and
greatest (Olympus?) digital cameras, or inherant in the idea of
the "digital camera".
The abilities and functions available *are* overwhelming to
someone new to photography, or someone who has always worked
with non-electrobrick cameras satisfactorily or, as in the
Masters, exquisitely. I do believe they put stumbling
blocks in a newbies path (that's me) or worse, and they'd
be a waste to someone for whom less new technology works
perfectly. However, using the OM1 makes me appreciate the
Canon so much more than I previously did (*and* increase my
appreciation of the OM1 as well).
I think the above is the biggest downfall of these electro-wonders.
> I saw a guy who was carrying his camera bag, and I snuck a peek,
> and saw that he carried the same thing I did, a flash, 3
> lenses, some film, the body.. but his bag was at least twice as
> big as mine.
...and here you've hit on a big inconveniece of my EOS kit. I
carry it in a backpack, but while walking the dogs I want
neither the size, nor the weight, but a camera I can grab and
sling over the shoulder, for which I have little fear of
dog-slobber nor tooth (anyone else photographing dogs have
experience with canine camera-hogs?) nor the electrobrick-fear
of sudden downpour (and I've mentioned that that's already
happened in a previous post - bloody summer storms!). The OM
has satisfied all of this (and I was bloody soasked as well
after that storm). Replacement price might also be an important
factor here.
> So I'm fairly happy with my OM.
So am I. It fits neatly in my normal work daypack, and I
carry it everywhere, probably the most important "function"
or "ability" this camera has for me. For all of the Canon's
functions, it doesn't take good pictures where it's at
home and I'm out and about.
> Question: Now I've read the design considerations that went
> into the OM system.. But it seems to me, that there is almost no
> meticulous attention to detail and design nowadays on any of
> the new cameras.
Call me a heretic, but I don't think of the OM's as pretty
things. Then, I like "chrome" (including the fake stuff on
newer bodies) rather than black metal/plastic, a taste which
seems to be against the grain. Aesthetically, I think the Leica
M-series are the most beautiful of cameras after those wooden, large
format, bellows and cape jobbies. To me, the Olympus is not so much
aesthetically pleasing as functionally pleasing - they are the
well-made nothing'll-stop-it, never break down, never deteriorate,
Landrover Defender (though a Landy friend leads me to believe that
there are specific models that satisfy this) compared to the BMW X5.
*That's* part of why I love them - lack of "flourish", love of function.
> Am I the only one that feels that way?? My camera feels like
> a brick, but my friend's feels like the dashboard of a Dodge Neon..
Undoubtedly not. I think it's a case of whatever floats your
boat. If it works for you, that is the *most* important thing.
My/our Impreza WRX does 0-100km/h in 6.3secs, but it's dash
is certainly no Audi RS4. Works for me though. Doesn't mean
I don't want an Audi RS4 either.
I love my OM1, but I use whichever tool I think is going to
work best. The clincher *is* however, that, if budget forced me
to make a choice between which kit I retained, I would retain and
build on the OM kit (compensating for it's lack of lenses with
a similar range currently in by EOS kit, from 20 to 300). I
*would* miss the Canon's AF though. There are many other reasons
to love my OM. It slows you down, it makes you understand
concepts better or at all, it's functional simplicity is condusive to
a simplistic "Zen" mindset that assists creative photographic
thought processes. These might be considered by me to be it's
most important and winning benefit.
I will always buy what works for me, and not what works for
others, be they the majority or minority.
I probably could have summarised all of the above by writing
"IMO", but I don't feel like working, and needed something to
compensate <grin>
I can't remember who it was though, who told us all to just
get out there and take photos, but after reading what I wrote above,
I feel he was talking to me. :-)
Cheers
Marc
Sydney, Oz
< 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 >
|