Well, just my two pennies, but I can't stand autofocus-only cameras. Both my
digital cameras are Olys and autofocus only. Playing
find-the-similarly-distanced-area-with-some-more-contrast-than-your-subject
game is really annoying. I know the mjuII is highly rated and the output
isn't bad but I prefer having control over the camera whenever possible. I
have two XA cameras, the original XA and the XA3 and on both, especially the
former, the optics are terrific and usefulness of both can't be
underestimated. The original XA can be a bit hard to focus in low light, but
the 3 is dead easy to use though the optics aren't quite as crisp.
On a side note, I recently got a Minox GT-S (the GT-E with DX coding) and
rate it even more highly than the XAs -- It's lens is as sharp as some SLRs
I've used.
I'd say go for XA, it's a little gem of a camera, unless you want to go new,
then give the Minox a try (not for feint of heart, to focus you have to be
good at guestimating distances).
> Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 15:45:09 -0700
> From: "Daniel J. Mitchell" <DanielMitchell@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: [OM] Point-and-shoots -- XA -vs- Stylus Epic/mjuII?
>
> Any thoughts on this comparison? I realise the XA is a rangefinder, the
> Stylus is autofocus, so it's pretty much apples and oranges right from the
> start, but on the offchance anyone out there owns them both, I thought I'd
> ask..
>
> I'm looking for something very pocket-sized to carry around if I don't want
> to lug the OM with me, and while I have another manufacturer's camera that
> does the job, I've seen enough things extolling the virtues of the glass in
> these that I'm tempted.. They both seem to come in at about the same price,
> even.
>
> thanks,
>
> -- dan
< 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 >
|