I got that far, too. I read all of all your posts, Moose. Never know when
I'll learn something. :-]
Indeed, I noticed, in an off-handed way, that the E-330 viewfinder was smaller
than the E-1's, but it bothered me so little that, although I have made a
mental note more than once to do so, I keep forgetting to do a side-by-side
comparison. I guess I could go do that now, but then I'd have to write some
sort of meaningful description of the difference, and I don't think it would be
worth the effort. Somehow, I seem to be suffering again today from a
sporadically recurrent exacerbation of the dimunition in my predilection for
pontification.
My opinion: it ain't no big deal.
Walt
--
"Anything more than 500 yards from
the car just isn't photogenic." --
Edward Weston
-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: Andrew Fildes <afildes@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Yes I got that far! I didn't find it a problem or even an irritation
> but perhaps I was enjoying the LCD too much and didn't rely or depend
> on it.
> AndrewF
>
>
> On 25/03/2006, at 4:55 PM, Moose wrote:
>
> > By the way, Walt and Andrew, if you get this far, reviewers are saying
> > how small and dim the E-330 finder is. Is it significantly worse than
> > the E-1 and E-500, or is this just a reaction to the big LCD?
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|