Thanks for the info. More than I actually needed, as I'm not going star
hunting anytime soon.
I was just curious why I see people write so often about how the mirror
lock-up makes the OM-1 particularly suitable for astrophotography. I can
see the reasoning behind a mechanical 'B' setting being necessary, but
that is available on all the single digit bodies, so what's the big deal
about the OM-1? That's why your OM-2 doesn't eat batteries on your long
exposures, 'B' is mechanical and works fine without batteries in the
camera at all. At least that is so on a 2n, and I believe the 2 is the
same, but mine doesn't work properly just now. The manual for the OM-2
that came with the 'n' version doesn't mention the fact that 'B' is
mechanical that I can find, but it is true. I've just had a 2n sitting
on my desk for several minutes with the shutter open and mirror up, on
'B' with a locking cable release and no batteries. Just released the
cable lock and the shutter closed and mirror went down - Yup, mechanical.
I did take some pics of the moon with an old folding 120 film camera
fitted to the eyepeice mount of the 4.25" reflector telescope I made out
of a piece of aluminum drainage pipe. That was over 40 years ago and the
bug hasn't bitten me since.
Moose
Fernando Gonzalez Gentile wrote:
Of course Moose. Plain OM2 (preferrably black ones) are the best ones for
long exposure astrophotog. Battery drain is nonsense, <snip>
< 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 >
|