>Tom Trottier wrote:
>===================================================================
>But black is less conspicuous in the dark, or even in the light, and
>especially if there are reflective surfaces. My tripod's black too.
>===================================================================
>True, Tom, black has its good points and I think it's a handsome finish
>when new. It's just that chrome plating is more durable than paint -
>or, at least, that's true of OMs; I'm not sure if it applies
>universally. Of course, in the case of my own OM-2S, any scuffs,
>scratches and brassing are my own fault and I'm aware of how they got
>there, so I don't worry about them. However, if I were buying a used
>camera, I might wonder what sort of rough treatment it had received if
>the finish was scruffy, and it's more likely to be that way if it's
>black.
>
To me, that's precisely why I'm much more tempted by an exc. cond. black
body than by a similar exc. cond. chrome body. Even though, to my eyes, the
chrome is more handsome, it tells me little of the camera's history,
whereas an unscuffed black body suggests to me that the camera has very
likely not been used or abused all that much whereas a chrome body that
shows markings of much of any sort is pretty obvious as a beater.
Mike Swaim
< 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 >
|