On Wednesday, November 12, 2003, at 02:55 AM, Tom Scales wrote:
Actually, I don't agree. The D100 is physically larger, but it handles
quite well. As a comparison, I just mounted the Tamron 28-200 on the
OM-4T
and the 28-200 Nikkor on the D100 and weighed them. The Tamron was the
closest equivalent to the Nikon 36-300 effective, since Olympus never
made a
similar zoom.
The OM-4 with lens OUTWEIGHED the Nikon with lens.
I like the D100 too. I was not criticizing its handling. It is a nice
camera. I was just relating the remarks of some D1X and D1H and F5
camera users who feel their larger cameras are better. No comparison to
the OM4T was made by me except for size. The D100 is lots larger in the
hand than the OM4T and if you check the weight with battery which both
cameras need to operate it weighs about 50 percent more. A pound versus
a little over a pound and a half. Notwithstanding the choice of a
Tamron for a comparison, an Oly 35-80/2.8 usually considered one the
moosiest of OM lenses and a shorter Nikkor 35-70/2.8 without the more
modern and heavier built in focus motor weigh within a fraction of an
ounce of each other.
Winsor
Long Beach, California, 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 >
|