Brian Windrim wrote
>
>Throw it away?!!? NOOOOOO!!!
>
>Don't do it Keith! XAs deserve better than that, and there are only a
finite
>number of them in the World (whereas the supply of XA2s seems limitless).
No, I'm too much of a miser to do that really. At worst I'd use it as an
ornament, for although it's perhaps not the most attractive looking Oly,
it's far from being the ugliest. My AZ-1 with the broken film transport, for
example, is just too ugly to display.
>Looking at the complexity inside a Mju-II (on the Olympus web site) I find
>it hard to believe that it will have the same longevity or survivability
>as an XA (12+ years for mine).
Mine was 18 years old yesterday so perhaps I shouldn't complain about its
first failure. I suppose it's because I don't much like its focal length and
I already seem to have a surfeit of cameras with 35mm lenses - a Minox 35
and a Ricoh 35AF that I bought for £1 just for its neckcord as it's the same
fitting as my Ricoh digital camera. The camera looked as though it had been
dug up out of a garden and its AA batteries were oozing out of their
compartment. It took two nights to clean it up and scrape the contacts clean
but it looks good and works fine now.
In retrospect I probably wouldn't buy a Mju for yet another 35mm.lens.
Regards,
Keith Berry (Birmingham, England)
keith_r.k.berry@xxxxxxxxxx
< 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 >
|