On 1/8/2014 4:42 PM, Bob Benson wrote:
> I have thoroughly enjoyed the EPL5,
Takes good pix, doesn't it?. I've been using a PM-2 a lot. The same camera,
with no mode dial and no tilting LCD.
I also have, and was using, an E-PL3. I like the tilting LCD, but not the
control wheel that changes modes on it's own,
in my real world. I've argued before here the merits of the simpler control
interface of the PM2.
> together with a VF2. among other
> virtues, makes the waist-high shot (like a twin lens) really nice. The
> original VF-1 works too. The VF4 is better, but also more expensive of
> course.
I dunno, for an EVF, I'd go with an OM-D. The size and simplicity of the PM2 is
part of what I like.
> The 17mm is an excellent choice. Personally, I find the 14-150
> very nice,
Oh yeah, I was just writing that while you were posting this. :-)
> but the 14-42 version II is very workmanlike for a lot less and,
> of course, smaller.
The 12-50 is a much better lens, greater range, macro, sturdier and
weatherized. Not much bigger either, when in use.
All the pix of 14-42 show it closed. Extended is another matter.
<http://zone-10.com/tope2/main.php?g2_itemId=6257>
> If the budget is a critical issue, I'd look at the EPL3, a VF1, and the
> 14-42. Should be readily available.
Anybody want the first and last items, drop me a line.
Putting the MICRO in µ4/3,
Moose
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|