Stephen Scharf wrote:
They aren't comparable only in the sense of the bulld quality. I would
wager the image quality of the 300D every bit as good as , and likely,
superior to that of the E-1. Depends on what you're looking for in a
camera.
Damn, I just put that in so B.D. wouldn't jump on me. Then I get hit
from the other side. :-)
I think the differences, ignoring most image quality differences (which
I'm not in a position to argue) go beyond build quality. The E-1 also
has true spot metering, which the 300D doesn't, apparently better
overall metering accuracy and a unique and apparently effective
automatic sensor cleaner. Then the 300D has a quite usable built-in
flash, superior low light focusing and an already established and future
assured upgrade path in digital bodies. The upshot is what I said, they
just aren't comparable. Which one is 'better' will depend on the
individual user.
For me, for example, the flash is a big deal. I would like to use fill
flash more with my OMs, but hate the hassle of carrying the flash and
the awkwardness on the camera, and the calculations sometimes needed. A
pop-up flash with controllable balance is pretty tempting. But
then.................
Moose
< 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 >
|