OM abandonment is not an issue. Having a 35-100/f2 the size and weight
of a C*non L 70-200/2.8 is an issue. Olympus abandoned the small,
light , high performance mantra that set the OM apart.
Olympus had doubts that small would be considered professional, so
they hesitated. P*ntax saw that small would attract dollars. Even
C*non with their Rebel showed that the E1 wasn't small. Olympus seems
to have finally begun responding to the small is better mantra.
Most of the list members have been using OMs for over 20 years.
Labeling a whale with the Olympus logo doesn't guarantee they will be
happy with it. If there was animosity on this list towards Olympus,
there would be far more members using P*ntax or something else. C*non
has a good camera that also works well with OM Zuikos. If you look at
how much Zuiko glass has been owned by this group, it is surprising
there isn't more C*non, N*kon, and P*ntax glass owned now.
Specs are important. Every time I lift my camera bag I am
re-acquainted with them.
-jeff
On 9/5/07, Leandro DUTRA <leandro.gfc.dutra@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> 2007/9/5, Chuck Norcutt <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> > Check the specs for the C. D40.
>
> What for? We have already bought into the 4/3 system, we already have
> the OM, we don't need heavier glass or full frame… and we don't
> particularly care about specs.
>
> It is allright to look aside, but I wonder why in an Olympus forum so
> many people try to sell Cannikon. I think the OM abandonment left too
> much bad blood.
>
> --
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|