Actually, to CH's concerns, the OM system is specifically at a
disadvantage. There are things it does exceptionally well, but in that
specific applicaiton, there is a weakness. Could I do it? Sure.
Easily? Depends on the specific lighting conditions, but as is always
done, if you show up at a pole-climbing contest with an axe instead of
a climbing belt, use the axe-, but start chopping on the competitors'
poles first.
I've run into the flash-sync limitations a few times through the
years. Before digital, the IS-3 and G40 flash combo really helped me
out, but since digital flash-sync speeds are so much higher I've not
been hindered at all. With the OM system, I'm not doing much outdoor
midday fill-flash and when I am, it's more often than not accompanied
by multiple off-camera flashes, so I have plenty of horsepower to
overcome the light.
I've also got the advantage of living far enough away from the equator
that the light isn't as bright. :)
Nikons have generally had a distinct advantage in maximum flash-sync
speeds, though, in their film cameras. Olympus stuck with the cloth
horizontal shutter (like Leica did too), for reasons which still don't
make much sense. In some ways the cloth shutter has some advantages,
but I still think that offering at least one model with a vertical
metal shutter would have been a good thing. The OM-2000 doesn't count.
I do like the low-frequency "clunk" of the cloth shutter instead of
the harsh metallic "clack" of the verticals. But that's about it.
AG
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|