On Tue, 4 Mar 2003, Rob Studdert wrote: > > Far from bland? But it looks exactly like its ZLR models E10 and E20. > > it is not sexy, and it hardly looks professional. > Looks can deceive those uneducated
In case you did not realize, those comments are directed to Pal. I was just puzzled how he can write off *ist D based on its looks. Pal stated that *ist D styling was unoriginal, unimaginative, non-sexy and derivative; and therefore it has no chance to succeed. My point is that Olympus 4/3 SLR is just as unoriginal, unimaginative, non-sexy and derivative. Yet, Pal is raving it as a true professional system. I personally thinks Pentax *ist D looks way better than the Olympus, and more like a real SLR rather than Olympus' ZLR look. -- --Lawrence Kwan--SMS Info Service/Ringtone Convertor--PGP:finger/www-- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.vex.net/~lawrence/ -Key ID:0x6D23F3C4--
