I think there is an inherent design problem in the OM-1 through 2n.
There is enough flex in the thin brass top plate and the little
cantilevered attachment holder inside that everything moves a bit from
the weight of the flash and the stress of anything that bumps it. (Wow,
that's the first argument for the T20 that means anything to me!) A lot
of these cameras with shoes mounted have small dents in the top plate
from the 'wings' of the shoe. I don't think pads, shaving, etc. will
help much as long as the central mounting screw flexes and the top plate
is soft and flexes. With any stress from weight, etc. everything is
going to flex until the wings press against the top plate to take the
load, and eventually crack.
Reinforcement of the base of the shoe and the underside of the top plate
might be a long term solution.
A Bounce Grip or other off camera flash holder can reduce red eye and
save your shoes too!
You could just use a cracked shoe for everyday, since they work just
fine, and put on a perfect one for formal events.
Moose
Norm Nadel wrote:
on 4/15/02 6:44 AM, Norm Nadel at ns.nadel@xxxxxxx wrote:
Subject: Cracks on Shoe 4
It seems obvious why the cracks occur. Was this a goof in the design by
Olympus or did they make the angle of the shoe legs a bit too narrow to get a
secure fit?
I think you're right about that... there is a slight mis-match in the
included angle of the shoe and the angle of the pentaprism cover metal.
This may have been engineered to insure a 'snug-looking' fit.
Has anyone filed down the inner surface of the sides slightly to prevent the
cracking?
There are little rubber pads inside there... do you mean to remove the
rubber pads, file, then reinstall the pads? That might work, kind of like
the 'hand-fitted' parts alleged to be used by Leica in the past.
< 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 >
|