AG Schnozz wrote:
>I just can't get excited about Canon. (nor can my wrists, but
>the new 20D may adequately address that).
>
OM-4, 35-105/3.5-4.5, film, hood, batteries = 2 lb 6.5
oz, 1100 g
300D, 24-85/3.5-4.5 (38-136 mm eq.), "film", hood, batteries = 2 lb 5.5
oz, 1065 g
I know 'cause they're sittin' right here and I just weighed them.
Picking them up, I've felt they weighed about the same, now I know. :-)
Of course, the zoom on the 300D is just a little bit longer range, 3.5x
vs. 3x. The Oly is less bulky and looks MUCH nicer.
Looks like the D20 adds about 120 g or 4 oz over the 300D. Now if you
put an extra grip with 2 batteries and vertical controls and stuff on
the Can*n, it becomes a real handful, but the comparison doesn't seem
fair to me. How about putting a winder and small flash on the OM?
Besides, the batteries last for ages and I'm perfectly capable of
turning it up for portrait mode without a special gadget. I tried a D60
with add-on grip and it was a real handful, big and heavy. The D20
without add-ons won't be and it's only a tiny bit bigger than the 300D.
>But that D2X sure looks *NICE*. Battery life of 2000 exposures?
> Do you realize how many GigaByte that is? Does it really
>matter since it has new 802.11bg capabilities?
>
No OM lens capability
Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|