In article , fdayrit@xxxxxxx wrote
>Stuart Goggin wrote:
>
>> Actually I would be happy, in fact really, really happy, if they simply made
>> the 2000 compatible with a motor drive and OM focussing screens.
>> Shouldn't be too much to ask as the focus screen looks to be about the same
>> size, and I am sure that the mechanical changes would not amount to much for
>> the motor drive.
>>
>> Stuart Goggin
>
>stuart,
>
>this would really be nice but given that cosina designed and produced OM2000
>was made in collaboration with probobly nikon, this would really be a design
>change to fit a motor drive to it. this might even mean a complete redo of the
>shutter mechanism for it to tolerate the stress of a motor drive. we can only
>hope that there are other things in the pipeline that is along the true OM
>lineage and not cosinas in disguise.
>
>francis
>
One reason that I would not like any development of the OM system to be
based on the OM2000 - I don't recall seeing this elsewhere - is that the
shutter speed dial is in the WRONG place.
A significant input on my purchase of an OM-1 all those years ago was
the placing of the shutter speed ring around the lens barrel. I had
used a Nikkormat a couple of times before that had this arrangement and
found it far more convenient than the 'traditional SLR' inaccessible
placement on the top plate. As far as I am aware, Olympus are the only
manufacturer that kept a common sense position of this vital control
that could be operated by the left hand while the right hand index
finger stayed over the shutter release.
Any future OM camera (though I personally doubt the rumours) must have
this feature IMO.
--
Kennedy
Yes, Socrates himself is particularly missed;
A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's pissed.
Python Philosophers (replace 'nospam' with 'kennedym' when replying)
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|