on 12/9/04 11:43 AM, Piers Hemy at piers@xxxxxxxx wrote:
> Yes, I do rememebr it. What a brute compared to an OM - and not as quiet as
> you might expect, either.
>
> If you think cleaning an OM mirror is a challenge (first catch your goos to
> get the requisite feather etc etc) then don't even consider cleaning that on
> a Pellix.
>
> The idea of no loss of image due to mirror closing was seductive, but the
> transformation of an f/1.8 lens into what, f/2.x took the shine off a
> little. Presumable the E*S RS has a similar concept.
>
>
> --
> Piers
If I remember the Canon Pellix, the mirror (called a pellicle I think...) is
actually not even glass, but made of some superthin semitransparent material
(nitrocellulose?) and there just plain flat out are no replacement parts
available anymore, anywhere at any price. For a camera with no mirror slap,
its still almost as loud as an SLR, not quiet like the rangefinder Canons
that were at that time still available I think. I believe the light loss due
to the pellicle mirror was about 1/3 stop, but the finder was kind of dim as
a tradeoff. The most common 'solution' for that was the f1.2 lens.
--
Jim Brokaw
OM-'s of all sorts, and no OM-oney...
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|