on 7/7/03 9:37 PM, RickM at zuiko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> The XA gets mentioned fairly regularly on the list and, though i've never
> actually seen one, from the various pics of them, they look well designed...
They are... some Maitani did just after the original OM series came out.
>
> Other than it being easier to carry around due to its size, why and when
> would you use an XA over an OM? The most easily available seem to be the
> XA2 and XA4 -- if i were to buy an XA, what's the practical *user*
> difference between the XA2 and the XA4, or the other models?
I can't say that I'd ever use an XA instead of an OM, but they -are- easier
to carry about. The lens is quite good, probably on par with the OM 35/2.8
lens (they are the same focal length and aperture, but I don't know if the
designs are related other than that.)
The XA and XA-2 seem more common on our favorite auction site... the XA-3 is
an updated XA-2, with DX film speed sensing as well as a 1600 ISO setting...
otherwise I think it is the same. The XA-4 is quite a bit rarer and had a
very short production run, so the prices are high, perhaps 3X the cost of an
XA and 4-5X the cost of the XA-2. It is different in having a close focusing
28/3.5 lens instead of the 35/3.5 of the XA-2 and XA-3. Note that only the
XA has a rangefinder and an f2.8 lens... for a carry-about camera that would
make it my first choice, although the zone focus of the XA-2, XA-3 and XA-4
might be a bit faster to use for 'grab shots'. Also, the XA requires you to
set an aperture and then verify the shutter speed is holdable... the -2, -3
and -4 all have programmed automatic exposure so you don't have that worry
(or that control...).
My two most 'practical' users choices would be XA then XA-3 or XA-2, in that
order. I'd beg out of the XA-4 due to the high cost (though I do have one
just in the interest of completeness <g>). For me, the XA offers the control
of aperture choice and precision focusing, that makes it more usable but
also more trouble for a 'point-and-shoot'.
If you really want an easy to use and no-trouble carry-about camera, you
should consider the Stylus Epic, its smaller than any XA-series, has a very
good 35/2.8 lens, offers auto-everything and a flash. Probably can be had
for about the same as a good XA, although you can buy them new (warranty and
all) for about $80 or so from B & H Photo.
>
> I'm actually hoping for reasons not to buy one, but just in case i do, i may
> as well get the most appropriate...
>
> OM content: a lot of the time, i only take the backpack on the commute as it
> carries an om and zuiko...
With an XA or the Stylus Epic, you really only need a shirt pocket...
>
> RickM
> [I have too many bodies, i really don't need more, repeat.... well an XA
> isn't really another body, is it?]
--
Jim Brokaw
OM-'s of all sorts, and no OM-oney...
and a few XA's, XA-2's, XA-3's and only one very very nice XA-4...
< 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 >
|