Well, at least Ed suffers from the same urban legend :-)
No really, I suspect he has also just heard about many people's
experience with Hasselblads, compared to Mamiyas.
In no way did I ever state this to be an actual problem for me, and
you actually summarise it quite well: It's like comparing an OM body
to a Nikon F.
The OMs are sweet, svelte, and sexy, but not as solid or problem-free
as a Nikon F. My 3Ti required service more than once.
I just mentioned this as part of the list of reasons to love a Mamiya
RB. It simply has a better reputation for reliability compared to a
Hasselblad, period.
Does not detract one bit from the cameras in actual use, but a
reputation is a reputation. No use denying that it doesn't exists (at
least amongst some people).
Dawid
On 24 May 2012, at 5:31 PM, Bill Pearce wrote:
> Where do you guys get this business that hasselblads are failure
> prone. You
> do understand that the OM's had that very same reputation, and yet
> it didn't
> seem to bother you when shooting 35, did it? I have never found
> either to be
> unreliable, or in fact any different from my nikon F's, which could
> be used
> to hammer nails. You are all victims of urban legend.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|