Wayne Culberson wrote:
>After reading Gary's lens tests some more, I think for me the easiest and
>cheapest way to get really critical vibration-free shots
>
I still think proper damping technique, as Oly says, is at least as
important as mirror/aperture lock-up, maybe more so. There is still that
first curtain that flies across the frame and lands with a bang.
Although fairly well damped, the energy has to go somewhere. Not an
issue at short shutter speeds, as it can only affect the last bit of the
frame, and not for long, but that's not what I'm using when I need
vibration control.
>is to use the OM2000, with both mirror and diaphragm prefire, and no listening
>to the full cycle of beeping self-timer (like I did last evening :-).
>
But, but, it doesn't sound like an OM, or feel like one, or look like
one, or......... I agree, the lack of a 3-4 second self-timer choice is
one of the few flaws in the OM-4(T)i) design. I've been keeping an 2000
around more in hope I'll really need perfectly registered multiple
exposures some day.
Actually, the OM-1(n) had one significant compromise vis a vis the best
mechanical SLR of the day. The F2 (and the F? I just can't remember. )
has a direct, mechanical action, sort of like the OM-1, but the Nik*n
activates both mirror and diaphram. Maybe they dropped mirror lock-up
alone on the OM-3 series because it didn't make much difference.
Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|