While I agree with George's comments, there is a certain value in the
'disposability' of the OM-G. I dropped one from a pretty decent height and
took a chunk out of the bottom, and it is still going strong.
For around $40-50 in great shape (with patience), they're sure cheap.
Tom
> Having owned just about every OM, (and I still have two OM-Gs), I like
them
> very much, they work very well, are more reliable than it's cousin, the
> OM-10, BUT I wouldn't want to bang one against a rock or something. Much
> plastic, as you mention. Forget about it surviving a fall, IMO. I know no
one
> 'plans' on dropping their camera, but unless you consider the 'G'
> 'disposable' and don't care what happens, an OM-1 would be a much much
better
> choice. Hold a '-1' and a 'G' in your hands and you'll know what I mean.
> Regards,
> George S.
>
> > I'm trying to put together a very light kit for backpacking. I see that
> > the OMG is the lightest body. I'm sure there's lots of plastic. Just
> > wondering what experience people have had with it? Thanks, John from
> > Olympia, WA.
> >
>
>
>
< 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 >
|