Hi all there,
When taking into consideration camera equipment - it has to be of highest
quality possible, that is recipricol of your affordability of the equipment.
But that of course is if you are serious, it is a passion and you see it as
either a long - term hobby or a carreer.
I would not enjoy photography if I didnt get joy out of my gear EVERYTIME i use
it. I get it from OM's and would definitely get it from Contax, Hasselblad,
Lecia, and even the good Mamiya med. format series.
When I first got into photography 8 months ago when I came across an old OM10
(with 50mm MACRO 3.5), I found out that I needed another, purely for a more
advanced metering system.
And because of my experience with certain instruments in laboratories
(spectrophotometers, etc), I learnt one very important thing;
ANOLOG is always more reliable and than DIGITAL!
(sometimes more precise in their measurements too, especially if their build
quility is of high standard).
Instrumental drift tends to more more common in digital instruments. I always
remember the digital balances (wieghting machines) in the lab where sent off
for calibration at least twice a year, and accross the room there where old
anolog balances that hadnt needed calibration for at least a few years [there
always dated last time and dates needed for calibration, usually every 6
months).
With regars to the camera equipment, re-calibration (shutters, curtains etc) is
only needed from what I know when wear, fatigue or simply plenty of work has
been applied to moving and other related parts of the camera. Other than that,
the 'lemon' cameras are very rare, the siezing camera is part of life, as too,
dropping or breaking your camera somehow.
SIMPLE, WELL CONSTRUCTED INSTRUMENTS ALWAYS LAST LONGER.
When asking about other brands of camera with my OM10 at many Perth camera
stores, they commented that they are a treat to work on (working on the N****
F5 for example is apparently a nightmare to some). I knew if there was less
room, excessive amounts of machinery, wiring, LCD plates et cetera, repair
costs would be huge.
I was then informed about the Zuiko lenses. I was at that time being compared
to the old Nikon series and also discovered the OM viewfinder was much more
adjusted to that of MF than what the smaller N**** viewfinder was. They also
felt equally as good (except for the film winder).
And lastly, the bodies where much smaller, lighter and to me, more aesthetic
than the 70's rivals, C****, N**** and even R****.
Happy new year too!
Damo
---------------------------------
My Yahoo!- It's My Yahoo! Get your own!
|