At 12:58 06/08/99 -0400, Doris wrote:
>
> Had Richard read the original post, he would have realized that the
>quote from Jim was referring to the use of a pinhole camera vs. an
>F5 + 300/2.8 to cover a boxing match. The idea being that for certain
>uses, certain types of cameras can and do make a difference.
I am well aware of the original post Doris, my point was that in a straight
comparison of technical performance between brands it's more appropriate to
compare similar systems. I am equally aware that you never suggested such
a comparison, but others have done - the thread started with a lens test
and some discussions of whether there was a "Leica look" IIRC. I don't
have all of them to refer to.
At the end of my post, I said " The performance of the top camera brands
doesn't vary that much, but what *does* vary is the versatility, handling
and feel. Compare an F5, an OM-4Ti and an M6. Horses for courses " which
is pretty much the same point as yours isn't it?
>
> You and Will address an issue I never approached, never said or
>imagined. I do not consider my M6 an "upgrade" (Nor my F4s) from Olympus.
I know. I deliberately used the words "change to another system", not
"upgrade". I thought I was agreeing with you! I'll make a mental note not
to answer two points in one post in future...
Regards
Richard
Richard Ross
Hemel Hempstead, England
rhdesign@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
< 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 >
|