But the Pentax K10D does give you DNG output. But, with batteries,
about 50% heavier than an OM-1. Amazing lens compatibility though.
But you could also take the Moose approach. You could use a 30D or 40D
which is perhaps 75% heavier than an OM-1 but crank up the ISO to as
high as 3200 such that you can use slow, light weight lenses.
Chuck Norcutt
Leandro DUTRA wrote:
> 2007/8/27, Jez Cunningham <jez.cunningham@xxxxxxxxx>:
>> You remember a while back the Oly marketing presentation that made a
>> comparison betwen the E-pro-thingy and the anticipated D300 and the
>> anticipated 40D? The one that was quickly withdrawn but someone saved?
>> Well now we have N*kon and C*non specs to compare, and we can see how
>> accurate they were. It'll be nice if someone could see how the E-pro-thingy
>> stacks up ?
>
> As Maitani wisely said, specs aren't important — the camera concept is.
>
> To me, Cannikon are nice as intermediates between the Olympuses and
> medium format — as witnessed by their reaching near-medium format
> resolution. But they are too big and heavy for me, they will never be
> decent OM (E-1, E-510), rangefinder (E-330) or Pen F (E-410)
> substitutes. Made for Goths and Scythians I figure; I need stuff made
> for Latins (me) and Easterners (missus).
>
> Unless digital technology changes radically, I don't see them dealing
> decently with vignetting and the such, M-8 wizardry withstanding;
> while I see technology advancing in miniaturisation, so I don't see
> myself needing anything bigger and heavier than 4/3 systems.
>
> What I do want now they don't give me: openness in output (DNG,
> OpenRaw) and camera control (gPhoto drivers). The latter doesn't
> exist, the former I would buy a Leica if I could.
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|