Since I agree I guess you didn't get the Irony.
(On my way out the door to take some B&W's of the snow with my ESII).
At 09:35 AM 2/20/2003 -0800, you wrote:
Peter Alling wrote:
>
> Almost?
Yup. Almost.
This aperture priority mechanical camera can match capabilities with
any of the newest cameras that happen to also offer mechanical, manual
operation.
Why do you suppose some camera makers still offer a manual operation
feature? So the operator can still maintain a little control over or
can override the exposure conditions, which SOME photogs still prefer,
on occasion.
If the owner is comfortable with doing it himself, there are few
cameras that can or will do it better.
If the operator's technique is correct, the camera will perform
beautifully! Nothing out of date or "inappropriately situated" about that!
Very well built (sturdy, positive acting, smooth and well-made.)
Reasonably small, yet comfortable to carry and use.
What more could you ask for in a mechanical, semi-automatic camera? <g>
Different, maybe. Better? I doubt it.
keith whaley
> At 04:17 AM 2/20/2003 -0800, you wrote:
>
> >Rob Studdert wrote:
> > >
> > > On 20 Feb 2003 at 3:24, Keith Whaley wrote:
> > >
> > > > Curious...I wonder why they'd need to make it 1/2" thicker?
> > > Well it has at least two motors and a battery that the MG doesn't for a
> > start.
> >True as well...
> >My trusty ol' MG is almost an anachronism by now... <g>
> >
> >keith
Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend.
Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read. --Groucho Marx
