I had my first night of class in my new photo class tonight. It's an
elementary photography and darkroom techniques class. Gotta love it. We
all had to let the instructor take a look at our cameras. There were
about 30 of us there and my OM-4T and OM-1n were the only system
cameras there, although one girl did have an OM-2000. After making the
rounds, the instructor pulled out an M6 (black tape over the logo,
natch) and started telling us how nothing in the 35mm gauge will take
photos that look as impressive as those from a Leic* rangefinder. He
explained his assertion, commenting on how they invented 35mm
photography and that a rangefinder has a much less complicated
light-path than an SLR, etc, etc, etc. Then he showed us a slide
presentation of the work of Henri Cartier Bresson, which he said was a
good example of photographs taken with one of the Holy Rangefinders.
I think I have Leic* envy. ;-)
His M6 *was* a pretty cool little box. It had an amazingly compact lens
on it, which kind of reminded me of an Oly pancake lens. It had a
small, hard Bakelite/plastic/whatever rectangular lens hood. He went on
to talk about how Leic* won't admit it, but their SLR models aren't
nearly as nice as their rangefinders. It was like a sales presentation
for the Holy Rangefinder. The shutter was really quiet, but my shutters
aren't exactly loud. That's always been a draw of the Oly system for
me, actually. They were always so much quieter and more compact than
most other SLRs.
SO, I know there are some of you out there who own both, are their
optics really nicer than Zuiko optics? I've always been really
impressed with Zuiko primes.
-Rob
< 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 >
|