On 16 Aug 98, at 12:11, *- DORIS FANG -* wrote:
> The Stylus is a decidedly different camera than the XA. You have the
> options of focus/exp freeze (partially depressing shutter button), and
> flash options, but that's it. If your wife wants a "coma" camera
> (mindless) then the Stylus is the way to go. The XA demands some user
> awareness and input (and rewards you richly). The RF seems simple enough
> to me, but the AF is a brain-dead thing. The lag time with the XA is but a
> fraction of that of the Stylus.
Hmmm... Sound like the XA is one I want, and since she manages
pretty well focussing my OM-10, the rangefinder/ or zone focus on
the XA-2 should be ok.
> > Is the Stylus Epic worth the extra money?
>
> From everything I read, yes. But it is still not an XA in many ways.
> For example: In the Chicago El trains, I often took pics of people sitting
> right next to me and across from me (in homage of Walker Evans's subway
> shots) without them knowing, something you cannot do with any AF save
> perhaps the Hexar. My XA's go on to several minutes' worth of exposure,
> and I've shot many a night scene propping them up on curbs, cafe' tables
> (usually a glass or cup turned upside down), mailboxes, building
> ornamentation, you name it. The Stylus and Epic can't come close. Oh, yes,
> spring for the A-16 if you can. It is well worth it. The XA synchs
> (straight synch, not the power robbing FP mode) out to 1/500th, something
> even the F5 and the Hexar don't do. Am I driving up the price yet ?
That cinches it. The XA sounds like the perfect camera to *always*
have on hand... Except now I might need two of them... :-)
Thanks.
Shawn & Janis Wright
swright@xxxxxxxxx
http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/~swright
(Olympus List Archives)
< 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 >
|