On 10/13/2014 6:31 PM, Chuck Norcutt wrote:
Why do you need an Imatest? If you can't see it with your eye well... you can't see it. Who wants to carry a shot
filled bag for a lightweight camera? If you consider it critical (I don't) then test with and without a shot filled
bag. If you can see a difference then get rid of the camera *and* the shot filled bag and get a different camera.
You tell 'em, Chuck!
The problem is that Mike is speculating, and it's easy to get one's thought in a knot doing that. Been there, done that,
have a closet full of the T-shirts. :-) You and I have taken oodles of shots with the anti-shock on, and know it's fine.
And all the newer bodies have the EFC option, so to me it's a non-issue.
Mike, just don't consider buying an E-M5, and all is well. :-) There are
other good options.
But then, Chuck, by your criterion, we should all have sold our OM-1s, 2s and 3s, because the aperture shock required
just that bag of weight with moderate teles. ;-) Oly didn't fix that until the OM-4s and OMPC, and the solution wasn't
nearly as elegant as EFC. I really disliked waiting for the self-timer.
Weightless Moose
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|