Dan, this response is so good that I'd suggest you post it to a site
where it will be archived for future reference.
Cheers!
ScottGee1
On 9/9/05, Daniel Sepke <dan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Alexandre,
>
> An excellent on topic question!
>
> You will find fans of each model on the list. Each model has its own
> strengths that you will have to use to pick to one that best fits your own
> needs and desires. Having been through this thought process myself I ended
> up purchasing examples of each model. Then I kept the one that fit me best.
> Below are some of my thoughts on each model in turn.
>
> 35SP
> This models unique feature is the built in spot meter. Physically it is the
> largest, smaller than an OM-1 but not by a significant degree. Its lens is
> fast and is, like all the ones under consideration, a very strong performer.
> The SP is in the middle of the price range of the three. Meter sensor is
> built into the viewfinder area and filter use will have to be manually
> compensated for (the other two have the cell mounted inside the filter ring
> on the lens). There are two rarer version of this model around; the SPn
> which adds a battery check feature, and the 35UC which as far as I know was
> just a Japanese domestic version with no extra features.
>
> 35RD
> Mid sized but the most expensive. The shutter on this model was prone to oil
> seepage and any one that you find will most likely require a CLA prior to
> use. Sharp fast lens design which is shared with the 35DC model (auto
> exposure only no manual override). The RD is the least common in my
> experience.
>
> 35RC
> Smallest and least expensive of the three. Still an excellent carry
> everywhere camera though. The shutter speed range is limited but still will
> suffice for most purposes. Due to its size the lens is slower (f2.8 vs
> f1.7). By far the RC is the most common of the Oly compact RF's. The RC also
> uses smaller filters (the other two use 49mm)
>
> All three have manual override though not all have metering in manual mode
> which means you will either need an external meter or you will have to be
> changing modes and extracting your exposure that way. None have a dedicated
> exposure compensation dial which leaves you having to adjust film speed
> setting on the meter. All are very solidly made and should last as long as
> an OM-1.
>
> As I mentioned in my introduction I have owned examples of all three models.
> The first model I had was an SP which I enjoyed but didn't always find due
> to its size that I would take it over an OM. That said it was my first RF
> camera and at the time I had not yet developed a technique for RF shooting.
> My next was an RD which following its required Camtech CLA and a Sparks Red
> Lizard coat became the camera I learnt how to work RF with. Since then I
> have tried an RC as well and found it to be fine performer but it didn't
> speak to me as well as the RD did. As you can probably guess the RD was the
> keeper for me. I got into the 35 series with a desire to have a physically
> smaller camera that still has high performance. It also needed to fill the
> double roll of working along side an OM as also be compact enough for the
> single camera light days. The RD is a clear winner for me in the latter
> respect. And it has held its own in one session where I had color neg film
> in the RD, B&W in an OM-2n and digital with an E-20.
>
> As to your question about if the RF's are suitable replacement for the 40mm
> f2... Well that is a tough one and a little apples to oranges. I didn't use
> that as my excuse to get into the RF's but it could work ;) . Do bear in
> mind that RF shooting is a different experience to working with an SLR. If
> you can adapt your shooting style to it then I say go for it. I do own the
> 40mm f2 as well as the RF but in practice I find I shoot in very different
> way when working with RF's in comparison to SLR's. With RF's I shoot more
> frames and I am deliberately a little looser in framing. It also encouraged
> me to shoot more with hyperfocal focusing, which in turn made me work more
> on composition. So the in the end I may have a similar FOV technically but a
> very different style of shot may be the result.
>
> I am sure there will be others who will share their stories but I urge you
> to try as many models as you can get your hands on and find the model that
> fits you best.
>
> HTH, Dan S.
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
> Of Alexander Lecarme
> Sent: Friday, September 09, 2005 2:15 PM
> To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [OM] olympus range-finder?
>
>
> Dear all,
>
> I am looking to buy an olympus range-finder camera with the fixed 42mm
> lens to replace the unaffordable OM Zuiko 40mm.
> Is this a good idea? And if yes, which is better? The 35 SP, 35 RC, 35
> RD, etc...?
> Sincerely,
> Alexandre Lecarme
>
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|