On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 8:48 AM, Ken Norton <ken@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Both! The OM-G was a decent improvement on the OM-10 in all respects,
> but
> > if you had any sort of OM-2x, you'd never pick the OM-G up. I managed to
> > get one somewhere in my eBay foibles because of something attached to
> it, I
> > think. Ag will skewer me, but I don't think I've ever put a roll through
> > it, though I do believe I replaced the seals on it! But that was because
> > it was a gooey mess.
>
> Nope. No skewering for that. I'd skewer you for the abandoned OM-4T,
> though. :)
>
It is the least abandoned of that which is abandoned. :/ Neck and neck
with an OM-2N.
After this weekend, the OM backpack gets fully restocked and ready for
> the season. Two bodies and lenses from 24mm to 300mm. This is in
> addition to my tiny OM go-kit of an OM body with two lenses. It's nice
> having enough stuff for two (or three or four) kits. However, looking
> back, there was a certain perverse joy in having just barely enough
> gear for one kit. It eliminated all the choosing.
>
I expect eventually you'll get around to developing the exposed film too.
When SWMBO wants the freezer space back?
Joel W.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|