Actually, virtually everything has weaknesses. The 4000ED had autofocus
issues and was better focused manually. Their software was terrible, almost
forcing Vuescan. At the time, it was a good value for the money, but I
would probably choose a Minolta if doing it today (although their recent
decision to exit the camera business would give me pause).
As mentioned a prior email, I like my Nikons and bought them purely because
they had the 12-24 and Canon didn't have a wide angle (for quite some time).
Now they do and they are advancing faster. If I was deciding now, I'd go
Canon. I didn't, but that doesn't make me unhappy.
As for the OMs, should I start with the OM-10 problems?
Tom
----- Original Message -----
From: "C.H.Ling" <chling@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <olympus@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 9:06 AM
Subject: [OM] Re: camera choices
>I bet Tom will say Nikon is the best, having been on this for many years I
>have never heard of Tom saying any problem or deficiency with the equipment
>he owned, from the OM system to the E-20 to the Nikon 4000ED scanner, Epson
>printer and the Nikon DSLR. It is good that people only see the good points
>of their tools so that he can use it more happily.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|