Horses for courses it seems.
Does ANY small format SLR currently available (film or digital) have a
removable finder? I *think* not. If memory serves Nikon eliminated
the option from the F6 so the F5 stands as the last body to offer it.
That said, I suspect most manufacturers saw this as an economic rather
than aesthetic decision.
I can see both points of view. I used F3/4 with action finders and
really enjoyed that capability. I did not, however, enjoy the weight
and bulk. Even without the action finder those cameras were rather
massive and if that's the price to pay for the flexibility, I wouldn't
do it.
I suspect a lot us on this list enjoy using OMs partially because
they're so compact. It's interesting to me to hear Maitani's
philosophy articulated by Khen in context rather than a static
interview with the master himself. Maitani is as much a philosopher
as an engineer so that influences his decisions. Pragmatism is lower
on the list.
For those who wanted/needed options it's easy to see that Canon, and
in the MF days particularly, Nikon offered a wide variety bodies.
>From the EM to the F3, they really covered the waterfront.
As a consumer, I always like to have the opportunity to make choices.
I'd really like to have the option of an action finder, but apparently
the market for such a product is too small to attract a manufacturer
to it. And truth to tell, it would probably be so expensive that I
couldn't justify purchasing a new one.
I'll continue using my OM gear for the same reason I use my Contax G;
each tool offers a unique experience and produces results I enjoy.
ScottGee1
On 8/31/06, Chuck Norcutt <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Regardless, my choice would have been to retain functionality rather
> than beauty.
>
> Chuck Norcutt
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|