Hi, Fernando and all.
>This is exactly why I prefer the 2 over the 2n. I'd rather have a correctly
>exposed picture with mixed light sources, using a tripod of course; than an
>underexposed flash picture ;))
The opposite for me. It could be OK if you were looking for such effect
but, if not intended, it would be very confusing...
With the 2n, if I ever get TTL flash underexposure, I notice the absence of
blinking in the viewfinder and think "Ooops, underexposed. I'll try with a
wider aperture". On the other hand, the same situation with the plain 2
would give me a 'blind' viewfinder for maybe a second or more -- time
enough to take te camera off my eye while thinking "What the...?" and then
click! (exposure completed).
Both cases just make for a wasted frame, but in case I'm not able to repeat
the shot, the 2n will give me a somewhat dark, though maybe useable pic.
But the plain 2 would get a fuzzy, ghostly image! It's very unlikely for me
to be using both tripod *and* flash -- in fact, I seldom use flash at all...
BTW, I don't see the point of TTL flash control on slow-sync pics. If you
try, whatever the way, to allow some underexposure from the flash (in order
to complete exposure via available light), it will make a full dump, so the
TTL control *won't* do anything at all... Then, why not set everything to
Manual?
>Maybe longer shutter speeds on high speed film is really important, but I
>seldom go over asa 100 - I used to shoot Tri X or TMax, but last time I used
>some Kodak @ asa 400 (print film), well I didn't like it at all...
First 400, then 1600, are my most frecuently used film speeds... And one of
the few things I don't like on the OM-2/2n (vs. the 2S/4/40/PC) is the top
film speed setting of ASA 1600 (vs. 3200).
>the smoother profile of the wind lever is cool, but i can live without it
My right thumb likes it very much :-)
>(as with the red diode in the viewfinder)
Essential in the OM-2n way to notice flash underexposure... (see above)
Maybe there's a way to 'mimic' the OM-2n flash behaviour on the plain 2...
setting the camera to OFF limits exposure time to about 1/30 (still
reasonably short) but I *think* it would still do TTL flash quench. [Can
anybody check this? My plain OM-2 won't fire the flash at all any longer
:-(]
But without the LED in the viewfinder, the only way to notice flash
underexposure would be looking to the light on the flash itself after each
shot -- sort of a hassle.
>This morning I realised I had ommited another important reason : AFAIK,
>you'll find a hard time getting a decent shoe4 and maybe even a TTLConn4.
I'm served on these bits... Maybe another good thing of the OM-2n (vs. the
plain 2) is the shoe unification with the -1n.
>Hope someone would build these shoes on bronze, steel or titanium. Why
>hasn't anyone pursued this idea yet?
Maybe they could damage the camera in case of shock. BTW, I like the look
of a shoe-less OM, and I seldom use flash, so... ;-)
Un abrazo,
...
Carlos J. Santisteban
<cjss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<http://cjss.galeon.com>
The olympus mailinglist olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: mailto:olympus-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
To contact the list admins: mailto:olympusadmins@xxxxxxxxxx?subject="Olympus
List Problem"
|