Reads like a Zone 10 article.
Chuck Norcutt
Ken Norton wrote:
> OK, my silence must be broken.
>
> 1. Honestly, I believe that it is a fare price. If anything happened to
> mine, I'd consider spending that much to get a replacement. (insurance
> money, of course). Besides, it's still cheeper than a full-frame'd digital
> wonder-brick that will be worth 1/4 the price in three years.
>
> 2. It may be similar to the OM-4Ti in many ways, but that's like saying a
> Shelby Mustang GT is like a factory stock Ford Mustang--only more expensive.
>
> 3. I don't brag, I continue to be humbled by the generosity of others.
>
> 4. The OM-3Ti fills a very specific niche within the OM line-up. Let me
> explain...
>
> On rare occasion I am known to disappear for a few days into the wilderness
> wherever that may be. I'm as "unplugged" (and some would suggest "unglued)
> as can be. I like to travel light, that means I try to pack as minimal of a
> kit possible. But the temperatures can be hot or they can be wintertime
> cold. Back before digital erupted on the scene we used to talk about things
> like this and the general concensus was that an OM-1 type of body was
> probably ideal because of the mechanical shutter, but the body that won out
> was the OM-2n as reaching that fine balance of reliability with feature-set.
>
> The OM-3Ti is kinda like the OM-2n in that it is a hybridization between the
> mechanical OM-1 and the more "modern" OM bodies. The OM-2n was unique in the
> "ultimate reliability" category so that's why it won out. Where the OM-2n is
> a fully-electronic camera with mechanical camera reliability, the OM-3Ti is
> a reliable mechanical camera with electronic camera features!
>
> The OM-3Ti is superior to the OM-2n in metering systems, OTF flash,
> mirror-chamber sensors instead of prism sensors, viewfinder diopter
> adjustments, film-advance lever, weather-sealing and being operational at
> all shutter-speeds with a dead battery. Also, speaking of batteries, the
> OM-3Ti's metering system is so light on battery use that the cells last much
> longer even in extreme cold. The OM-2n obviously has an advantage in the
> availability of auto-exposure, 2-minute auto OTF exposures, mirror pre-fire
> and lower-price and higher-availability. But the OM-2n does suffer from
> flaky ISO dial issues too... Obviously, the OM-4Ti has earned its chops
> through the years as being just as, if not more reliable than the OM-2n, but
> I believe the reputation of the original OM-4 tainted it a little and back
> in the days that we discussed this stuff, the OM-4Ti was still rather pricy
> too!
>
> So, where I'm going with all this nonesense is that if I'm heading out
> somewhere with just one OM body, the hands-down choice is the OM-3Ti.
>
> That said, if I'm event shooting and packing motordrives and flashes while
> having a couple of cameras hanging off my neck and shoulder, the preferred
> choice is the OM-4T and the OM-2S. I'm not so proud as to not admit that I
> use auto-exposure mode. I can auto-expose with the best of them. This is a
> technology advance which I wholeheartily embrace under certain working
> conditions.
>
> On several occasions now, I've exclusively shot events with the OM-3Ti and
> 35mm F2.8 lens and high-speed film. What a wonderful LITTLE setup. This is
> probably as close to a Leica as I'll ever get. Maybe someday I'll have an F2
> lens or maybe not. Doesn't matter, because I'm perfectly happy with what I
> have and I use it every chance I get. The OM-3Ti with 35-80 F2.8 lens is
> another wonderful combination, but the weight and balance is totally
> different and it's just a little harder to look "harmless" with it. Add the
> MD2 and T45 flash and "harmless" is a foreign concept--children and small
> animals run for cover.
>
> So, to wrap this diatribe (prolonged discourse) up, let me just summarize:
> The OM-3Ti is an unique camera within the OM line and is recognized as a
> "collectable", but to the dedicated photographer represents the "best of the
> breed." The camera is much more than the sum of its parts--and demands the
> best from the photographer. It is not as easy to use as an electronic
> wildabeast, as there is almost no automation to speak of, so the
> photographer has to play a much more active roll in shooting the camera.
>
> Are my pictures "better" with the OM-3Ti than the other OM bodies? Actually,
> yes. It is specifically due to the above paragraph. The camera demands that
> I step up to the plate and swing for the fences. There are no "base hits"
> with this camera--it's an all or nothing camera. Then there is also the part
> about "raised expectations." This is the self gnawing thing where you know
> you have a special camera so you work extra hard to get the most out of it.
> A mere "snapshot" is kinda below it.
>
> I got home about 0530 this morning from a late-night fiber-optic maintenance
> that had me across the state. When I walked in I saw the magical package
> from the Fuji processing center containing three rolls of developed Provia
> 100F. Of course, I had to run them through the viewer before going to bed.
> :) Are you nuts? Duh! Let them wait? I don't think so.... Anyway, there
> were several shots taken with the OM-3Ti and 35-80 F2.8 that stood out from
> the rest as being direct examples of what I just wrote. Knowing what I had
> meant that I worked extra hard to get the shot absolutely right. The rewards
> are great.
>
> AG Schnozz
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|