William wrote:
>None! Electronically timed shutters are less mechanically complex and
>have superior accuracy. I was around during the period when
>manufacturers went from mechanical to electronic timing, and you could
>really see the difference in magazine reviews.
I agree, that an electronically timed shutter is less complex than a
mechanical one and should be more precise (seems that nobody can help the
mechanical shutter of the old Olympus FTL). On the other hand the typical
magazine reviews of the photo press are in my personal opinion a weak
argument. They always prefer the newer solutions and speak in unity with
the manufacturers, who want to sell their new products. If you believe
those papers, you can conclude from their articles, that "there were
sometimes those good zuiko lenses, but nowadays even Sigma lenses are
better" (this I have heard sometimes), or "APS is better than 35mm", or "a
modern lens without an aspherical element can not be state of the art", or
"a tele lens without ED glass should be thrown away", or "a lens without
multi coating is shit", or "products with prices beyond good and evil must
be the best", or "you can't live without AF". But they are clever enough
not to offend their readers, which use 35mm to 99 percent and recently also
APS, so you seldom find an articel about medium format with conclusions
different to the wisdom: "with medium format you can cut the edges of the
picture after having taken it". Sorry, I gotten upset so often when I have
read in such papers. They were able to convince the buyers to choose those
things you find in the shops nowadays.
Matthias
< 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 >
|