Next <
Subject: Re: Olympus Leads the Japanese MILC Run
Full headers:
From: PeterN <"peter,newdelete">
Subject: Re: Olympus Leads the Japanese MILC Run
Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2018 14:09:43 -0500
Organization: NewsGuy - Unlimited Usenet $23.95
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <p3otmo$dq9$>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
In-Reply-To: <p3qupu$r7s$>
Content-Language: en-US
X-Received-Body-CRC: 2723524990
X-Received-Bytes: 2178
Print Article
Forward Article
On 1/18/2018 3:07 PM, Neil wrote:


> No doubt that brand choices are made for various reasons, and some of 
> the makes are comparable in most ways. I was fortunate, in that all of 
> my kits paid for themselves through the work that I did with them. In 
> terms of image quality, I think that lenses make the biggest difference.
> In the digital world, I'd say that ease of use is pretty important, 
> since they're all less efficient than film cameras. So, control 
> placement, menu structure, and a well thought out user interface are the 
> most important factors to me.

Each of us has our own criteria.

> I've never been a fan of autofocus, finding it more of a compositional 
> hindrance than a benefit. When combined with a varifocal lens, the 
> camera becomes pretty useless to me. So, my choices are mostly for the 
> least frustrating kits!
Autofocus can be a real PITA, or it can be a blessing, depending on the 
subject you are shooting. i rarely use AF for macro and landscape. When 
shooting critters it depends. For fast moving ones, I have found AF 
quite helpful. For some shots I prefer to preselect focus and exposure.