It's all good. At least you are still shooting film! Just as an FYI, RZ
lenses are all metal too (I have had plenty of them apart for cleaning and
adjustment).
I think I have only changed the battery in my RZ once in maybe 5 years? And
even then it didn't need it, I was trying to debug another issue. So,
battery dependence = non-issue, IMNSHO.
The things I like better RZ vs RB are the interlocks, the lighter weight and
smaller size, the more modern/recent build quality, better/more/newer lenses
(in some cases there are RB equivalents), AE Prism Finder II, etc. The RZ
is plenty solid (too much so in some cases... ).
I usually carry 4 lenses at any one time, plus the 1.4x converter. Usually
110 (on camera), 50ULD or 65L/A, 37mm, and a longer lens e.g. 140M-L/A,
250APO, 350APO or something along those lines.
If you get a chance, try an RZ sometime. It's like an old friend, only more
updated. Plus it can use all the RB lenses you already have. ;-)
-Ed
On 5/24/12 6:16 AM, "olympus-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx"
<olympus-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Well Ed, let's just consider it a matter of personal preference.
>
> I really like the mechanical RB body, and the all-metal, more compact
> C-series lenses, even if some of them are optically inferiour to the
> RZ equivalents.
> There's something deliciously solid and simple to the RB system, and I
> do like the lack of dependence on batteries :-)
>
> Both are fantastic systems. Oh, I don't take all 6 lenses with me all
> the time, I usually pair it down to a 4-lens kit for lighter
> traveling: 37mm/65mm/140mm/250mm
> I have loved the RB system since I stared using it in 2008, it's just
> perfect for my needs.
>
> Dawid
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|