Gene Wilburn wrote:
>Although I've owned a pair of OM-1's since 1972 (and still have them),
>consider me a newbie. I simply bought a few primes and used the cams
>and have never learned much OM lore.
>
>My OM-1's have sat a bit idle in recent years as I've been 'shooting
>around' -- being equipment promiscuous with a number of different
>types of cameras. It's been fun actually and I've learned a lot about
>my likes and dislikes.
>
>Now I've come full circle. I've rediscovered my OM-1's and have been
>thoroughly enjoying them once again -- thanks Piers for that excellent
>50mm/1.4 lens! Both OM-1 bodies are in great condition. But an
>opportunity has arisen to purchase a used OM-4T from a friend. The
>question for me is, is it worth it?
>
>I shoot primarily B&W -- slow film in one cam, fast film in the other.
>I rarely shoot slides (sorry, I use digital for most of my colour
>work). I occasionally shoot col negative film. I usually shoot
>handheld though I use a tripod for long lenses, macros and portraits.
>The tripod work makes up a smallish percentage of my overall shooting.
>I prefer handheld metering over in-camera metering for most of my work
>unless I'm travelling and want to carry minimal gear.
>
>WIth this background, would a 4T be a significant step up for me? I'm
>a bit puzzled as to why the resolution marks in Gary's charts always
>favour the 4T over the 1. Is this related only to very careful tripod
>work and inherent OM-1 internal vibration? Would I see this difference
>in the 'real' (i.e. handheld) world?
>
>Gene
>
>==============================================
>List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
>List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
>==============================================
>
>
>
>
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|