On 12/10/08 12:39 AM, "Dawid Loubser" <dawidl@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> P.S. I really do feel that it would be preferable to limit to OM-1 and
> OM-3 (all-mechanical
> bodies) - not because the result necessarily looks any different from
> the electronic bodies, but
> because it was my rant on the photographic process with an OM-1/3 -
> which we have somehow "lost"
> with modern equipment - which got this idea started, and those bodies
> exemplify that process.
> Not only that, they enforce it. Even though, of course, we can follow
> it with any other body.
>
> I have been doing manual exposure + incident metering for quite some
> time with my 9FPS Canon EOS,
> which is why I could let it go so easily. But it's somehow not the
> same thing.
>
> Your thoughts? And Wayne, I don't think an OM-3 has any advantage over
> an OM-4 in terms of producing
> the photographic result, so there may not be anything to see...
>
Some of us don't have access to an all mechanical OM. But I could use my
Hasselblad...It doesn't even have a meter. You can't get any more manual
than that! On the other hand, my Mamiya 645 doesn't have a meter either but
it has an electronically timed shutter!
--
Chris Crawford
Photography & Graphic Design
Fort Wayne, Indiana
http://www.chriscrawfordphoto.com My portfolio
http://blog.chriscrawfordphoto.com My latest work!
http://www.plumpatrin.com Something the world NEEDS.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|