It's probably the best SLR finder ever made. I find the new full
frame bodies like the Nikon D3 & D700 are almost as good as an old
film finder - were you referring to an 1D or 1Ds? But nothing
compares to an OM-1 with no flash shoe - just drop the eye into it.
Specks in lenses were often not dust but tiny particles of the black
paint used to edge coat the lens elements - which seem to break away
with time. A few don't seem to have any effect on images especially
if you really have to hunt for them. Any lens of that age is going to
have some - it is possible to get it cleaned of course but not
usually necessary (unless it really, really bothers you).
Of course, you could complain to the seller and request a discount -
they really should have been mentioned in an ebay listing, for instance.
Andrew Fildes
afildes@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
On 26/09/2008, at 7:34 PM, Dawid Loubser wrote:
> I guess this is said a lot, but allow me to express amazement at how
> much bigger
> and brighter the OM-1's viewfinder is compared to a Canon EOS 1-series
> DSLR (which has
> a pretty darn good viewfinder already).
> SNIP
>
> The lens appears to have a lot of small specks inside it which is
> either dust, or something
> else - visible only in bright, direct sunlight shining on the lens
> from an angle. I hope it
> won't affect performance, though I imagine it could lower the contrast
> of a shot
> taken into the sun - will have to test. I *really* hope it's not some
> problem with the coating
> of the lens, this 90mm was bloody expensive!! It looks near mint in
> all other respects though,
> so I am suspecting strangely-regular dust for the moment.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|