ML Archiv: Re: [OM] a question

Subject:	Re: [OM] a question
From:	ClassicVW@xxxxxxx
Date:	Thu, 11 Jan 2001 14:04:30 EST

In a message dated 1/11/01 12:07:54 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
spknsprkt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:

<< Actually this is not true on an OM2 orOM2n. 
Not sure about the OM-10 though.
  >>
I was referring to an OM-10. At least i thought that's what Nicola had.

George S.

< 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 >

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
Re: [OM] a question, (continued) Re: [OM] a question, John A. Lind RE: [OM] a question, Brian P. Huber Re: [OM] a question, Ray Moth Re: [OM] a question, ClassicVW Re: [OM] a question, Jim Couch Re: [OM] a question, John A. Lind R: [OM] a question, galactica1 Re: [OM] a question, clark . ll Re: [OM] a question, frieder . faig Re: [OM] a question, Jim Couch Re: [OM] a question, ClassicVW <= Re: [OM] a question, Jim Couch Re: [OM] a question, HI100

Previous by Date:	[OM] 50/2 macro vs. 90/2 macro, Eric Pederson
Next by Date:	Re: [OM] Chili, Ken Norton
Previous by Thread:	Re: [OM] a question, Jim Couch
Next by Thread:	Re: [OM] a question, Jim Couch
Indexes:	[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]