Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] Re: New Assessment of M8 by a Pro

Subject: [OM] Re: New Assessment of M8 by a Pro
From: Andrew Fildes <afildes@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2008 18:06:13 +1000
What camera is not junk compared with its ancestors? You'd need to  
compare it with an M7 to be fair.
No-one could afford to make an M3 any more - even Leica cheapened it  
down a bit (rangefinder mechanism) in subsequent models. That's why a  
nice one still costs more than an E-520 with all the trimmings. And  
don't even mention the near mint black M4 I saw the other day - I'll  
start sobbing.
Would you compare a D300 with an F or F2 or FTn? (Absolute tanks)
A Canon D40 with an early body like my Canonflex?
A Sony A700 with a Minolta SRT?
A K20D with a Spotmatic?
Each of them represent a different world of engineering. The body  
shape and function is the same but everything inside and out is of a  
different standard. I once stripped down the top deck of a late  
1950's Ricoh 519  and was blown away by the design of the rangefinder  
- a big, solid, cemented double element with a semi-silvered mirror  
on the angled interface. Hardly surprising that a clean one works as  
well as the day it was born.
Andrew Fildes (who works both better and worse than the day he was  
born).
afildes@xxxxxxxxxxxxx



On 14/06/2008, at 10:28 AM, John Hudson wrote:

> I'd bet that the M8 is a piece of 21st century junk compared to the  
> M3 of
> old.



==============================================
List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies:        olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz