2007/8/27, Jez Cunningham <jez.cunningham@xxxxxxxxx>:
> You remember a while back the Oly marketing presentation that made a
> comparison betwen the E-pro-thingy and the anticipated D300 and the
> anticipated 40D? The one that was quickly withdrawn but someone saved?
> Well now we have N*kon and C*non specs to compare, and we can see how
> accurate they were. It'll be nice if someone could see how the E-pro-thingy
> stacks up ?
As Maitani wisely said, specs aren't important — the camera concept is.
To me, Cannikon are nice as intermediates between the Olympuses and
medium format — as witnessed by their reaching near-medium format
resolution. But they are too big and heavy for me, they will never be
decent OM (E-1, E-510), rangefinder (E-330) or Pen F (E-410)
substitutes. Made for Goths and Scythians I figure; I need stuff made
for Latins (me) and Easterners (missus).
Unless digital technology changes radically, I don't see them dealing
decently with vignetting and the such, M-8 wizardry withstanding;
while I see technology advancing in miniaturisation, so I don't see
myself needing anything bigger and heavier than 4/3 systems.
What I do want now they don't give me: openness in output (DNG,
OpenRaw) and camera control (gPhoto drivers). The latter doesn't
exist, the former I would buy a Leica if I could.
--
+55 (11) 5685 2219 xmpp:leandrod@xxxxxxxxxx
+55 (11) 9406 7191 Yahoo!: ymsgr:sendIM?lgcdutra
+55 (11) 5686 9607 ICQ/AIM: aim:GoIM?screenname=61287803
MSN: msnim:chat?contact=leandro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|