Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] IS-10 ruggedness

Subject: Re: [OM] IS-10 ruggedness
From: gma <gma@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 21:13:27 -0700

William Sommerwerck wrote:

> I've heard horror stories about the IS-10 (and plastic-bodied autofocus
> cameras from other companies) being severely damaged when dropped.
> (Something gets bent out of shape that can't be easily fixed.) I've
> dropped mine several times, with only minor cosmetic damage.

I've got a feeling if I dropped my IS-3, it would probably have to go in for
service.

>
>
> The plastics used in most P&S cameras are quite sturdy, and can stand a
> lot of abuse. (There's a question on this subject in the October Pop
> Photo's "50 Questions" article, which I <ahem> wrote.)

Whoaa! Hey, a celebrity on the list!  Cool, I'm gonna go read that article
tonite!

>
>
> I bought the IS-10 because I was afraid of taking my OM-4Ti out of the
> house on all but special occasions. If the IS-10 is lost or damaged, I'm
> out "only" $300 or so. (Have you priced an OM-4Ti body lately? Ouch! Not
> to mention the flash, motor drive, battery pack, and whatever lens
> you're using.)
>
> As to the IS-10's image quality... I've gotten some nice 8x12s from it.
> But the lens seems to be "very good" rather than "exceptional." Later
> this year I plan to shoot a series of test shots at the same apertures
> and have them printed at the same time, just to see if there's a
> meaningful difference. (The 1-hour lab at the Kirkland, WA Costco does a
> fine job. And their reprints are nothing short of superb. They really
> care about quality, and one of the guys has exactly the same taste in
> density and color balance as I do.)
>
>




< 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 >


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz