On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 9:36 AM, Ken Norton<ken@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Joel did a great job describing the pros and cons of the OM-2000. Granted,
> it's not in the same league as a single-digit OM body in construction, but
> it's no worse than any plastic-clad DSLR from most any brand. There was one
> of us that eventually ran into an issue where he was literally wearing the
> poor camera out, but that's not usual workload for most of us.
>
> Two reasons alone to have one is the higher flash sync-speed and the
> double-exposure mode. The fact it also has a spot-meter ain't half bad
> either. Oh, did I mention it's substantially lighter than a single-digit OM
> body?
On the other hand, I remember the first time I put my OM2000 in Ken's
hands and he looked at it at arm's length and passed it back like he'd
just seen poop. Similar reaction to my Sigma 19-35, although he did
mount it on his OM-2S and remarked simply, "It focuses in the wrong
direction."
My other film system is N, so I took it in stride.
For left-eyed shooters (which I was convinced at one point was every
other Olympus shooter), the OM2000 needs a little modification to
allow the shutter to work without the lever being half-cocked, poking
said shooter in his southpaw forehead. Frank VL figured that out and
I think the procedure he wrote up is out there somewhere.
Joel W.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|