It's a slippery slope. By not having a stable of autofocus lenses, the switch
from film to digital was pretty easy for me. I could make my decision on pure
merits of each system.
In the end, about 25% of my decision to buy the E-System related to my Olympus
brand loyalty and the use of OM-System lenses. The remainder was on the
system's merits.
I've been very, very happy with the camera. The only real complaints/wishes
are: 1. I sometimes wish it had more resolution (but I haven't used all the 5MP
yet). 2, More focus points to avoid moving subjects from getting lost between
the 3 points. 3. Lower noise at 1600, which would help with indoor sports. 4.
Nits: ISO in the finder, lock for drive mode, way to turn the front-mounted WB
button off (I hit it somewhat regularly), more zoom on the LCD, bigger or
brighter LCD, more lens choices, availability of a focusing screen with a MF
aid.
The camera has done exactly what I wanted, produce thousands of good images
with little post processing required. I very, very rarely need more
resolution. The three lenses that I have 11-22, 14-54, and 50-200 consume
90-95% of my needs. My 90/2 and 24/2 are seeing regular, but limited use as a
great macro and an available-light, f/2.0 normal lens. Oh, and I don't have
any dust spots either.
Be careful of the E300's kit lenses, as the maxiumum aperture makes them a
little dark. The AF may be slower with them too than with the other lenses.
Skip
----- Original Message ---------------
Subject: [OM] 4/3
From: jowilcox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 11:45:17 -0600
To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
>
>I have been looking for reasons not to move along with
>Olympus to a digital SLR. But I am weakening.
>
>Like many others, I have longed for a digital body that
>would allow me to get some use from my film lenses. In
>fact, it would have been the deciding factor a year or even
>six months ago. That thinking lead me somewhat reluctantly
>to N*kon. I have a more modest investment in N*kkor lenses
>than Zuikos, but a couple are very good and with the 1.6x
>factor, the 24mm and 55/2.8 micro would be quite usable.
>The 2x factor that Olympus gives us, plus the need for an
>adapter, where the N*kon can take the lens natively, seemed
>to militate against Olympus.
>
>But the more I have learned from the C-5060, and now the
>C-8080, the less I feel like a digital afterlife for my film
>lenses is really a major factor. I think it's a bit of a
>mirage. As a special case, you might get some images with
>the 50/2 (wish I had one) or the 90/2, but I don't think one
>is going to do the lion's share of his work with the old
>lenses. It's the new ones that will really count.
>
>I also didn't think much of the 4/3 standard. 3/2 is the
>golden ratio, right?
>
>But I find I like 4/3. I don't know what it is, but I feel
>comfortable composing with it. It is actually one factor
>putting Olympus over the top for me. I don't think I'd
>enjoy a DSLR now that doesn't use the 4/3 standard. I'd
>have sworn a blue streak of denials if anyone had predicted
>that even three months ago.
>
>If 4/3 is a cul-de-sac, so is Nirvana. That's not a very
>telling argument.
>
>And if the E-300 is built comparably to the C-8080, I'm
>probably a goner.
>
>Joel W.
>
>
>
>
>==============================================
>List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
>List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
>==============================================
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|