WS wrote:
> The OM system is hardly obsolete, any more than a Nikon F or
> Leica IIIf is obsolete. But technology changes...
True, technology does change. But some aspects of the human
element don't. Chopsticks are ancient technology--the Fork and
Knife long since deemed a superior eating technology. Why,
then, does arguably the most technologically modern society
(Japan) still use chopsticks?
Had Olympus taken the IS-3 and made an OM-mount version of that,
they could have stayed viable in SLR world a whole lot longer.
Only in the last handful of years has auto-focus advanced to the
point where it is an obvious advantage over manual-focus. (but
not in all cases). I used my IS-3 the other day for a little
project--what a sweet camera it is. The lens is very good, but
yet, it isn't an OM--not in handling, nor in operation. The lack
of a focus ring killed that camera. I just can't get over that
the LCD display cannot be used for chimping.
AG
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|