In a message dated 12/16/98 4:26:31 AM Eastern Standard Time,
cpl49@xxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:
<< So of all people, should we be recommending the OM2000 when a
newbie asks the question or should we recommend AGAINST the OM2000
and suggest a used OM-1 instead? Should we act as "evangelists"
for the OM system in general and make sure that Olympus is
successful with their SLR products and continue to develop new
products for it >>
If we are "evangelists" then we also need to make sure the advice we give is
appropriate. I think the OM-2000 is a great camera for a beginner learning
general photography. In the most recent thread on the newsgroup the person was
looking for a camera to do astrophotography. In this situation the OM-1 is
much better suited and will give better results. I was one of the people who
recommended they go with an OM-1 (including a CLA). In the past I have also
recommended the OM-2000, to different people with different interests. If this
person went out and bought an OM-2000 for astrophotography, and it wasn't up
to the task, he might be turned off to the OM system entirely. On the other
hand, the OM-2000 is probably better for astrophotography than most of the
current "wonderbricks." Can you imagine hanging an F5 or EOS-1N off the end of
an 8" or 10" Schmidt-Cassegrain?
Paul Schings
Coventry, RI
< 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 >
|