New $999 E-330 is magnesium, MAGNESIUM!!!!!!!!!!!!

Chimp wrote:


"Rich" wrote in message
...
I thought it was too much to hope for, given it's $999 kit street
price, but when I saw the images, I knew it wasn't plastic!
Here's the proof.

http://www.mycen.com.my/picturestory/e330_a.html


But the drawbacks are already becoming apparent - no auto-focus with 'live
preview', so you're forced to peer through a substandard viewfinder in
order to use AF lenses.

wrong.




--

Stacey

Chimp wrote:

I've just read about the one second delay - the specs seem to be getting
worse, it all seems a bit gimmicky to me.

Besides, what is all this fuss about 'live preview', anyway? - why not just
buy a Zigview?

It won't work underwater for one. The E-330 has an underwater housing
designed for it and that should be pretty nice to use with the LCD on
the back instead of the optical viewfinder. The Zigview also does not,
as near as I can tell, tilt as the E-330 LCD does. The E-330 also
offers a manual focusing aid, but we'll have to see how well it works in
practice.

After watching people shoot with one eye squinted closed it isn't hard
to see why optical viewfinders are rapidly disappearing on consumer cameras.

"Stacey" wrote in message
...
Chimp wrote:


"Rich" wrote in message
...
I thought it was too much to hope for, given it's $999 kit street
price, but when I saw the images, I knew it wasn't plastic!
Here's the proof.

http://www.mycen.com.my/picturestory/e330_a.html


But the drawbacks are already becoming apparent - no auto-focus with
'live
preview', so you're forced to peer through a substandard viewfinder in
order to use AF lenses.

wrong

Well, al the reviews so far state that it's even dimmer than its
predecessor - but as you have obviously tried one yourself, perhaps we
should take your word on the matter?

You're a die-hard Olympus crank, so you will never see any shortcomings in
their products. My own view, fwiw, is that Olympus are forced to add these
unnecessary gimmicks to their cameras in an attempt to boost dwindling sales
that have the Four-Thirds system as their root cause.

I'm only surprised that the thing doesn't (yet) play MP3's. - and why not a
built in FM radio while they're at it?...

"Rich" skrev i en meddelelse
...
Nonsense. People do this with some macro modes on P&S cameras all the
time. If you have trouble focusing a few inches from your face, get
glasses.
-Rich

How many people with P&S do you know that use manual focus?

L.T

The ultimate irony will be if Rich ends up with a plastic coffin,
eternity in plastic



Hmmmm...

Hundreds of people with reason to be ****ed at Rich + paypal account for
donations + Tony (two times) Gambini = Star Chamber = Peace, Joy & Goodwill
to all.

Rich writes:

I thought it was too much to hope for, given it's $999 kit street
price, but when I saw the images, I knew it wasn't plastic!
Here's the proof.

http://www.mycen.com.my/picturestory/e330_a.html

That's *terrible*, I'm so sorry. Who'd have thought a reputatble
company like that would have built a camera that's a *fire hazard*?


:-)
--
David Dyer-Bennet, , http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/
RKBA: http://noguns-nomoney.com/ http://www.dd-b.net/carry/
Pics: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/ http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/
Dragaera/Steven Brust: http://dragaera.info/

In ,
Rich scribed:
I thought it was too much to hope for, given it's $999 kit street
price, but when I saw the images, I knew it wasn't plastic!
Here's the proof.

http://www.mycen.com.my/picturestory/e330_a.html

You do get excitable. But I suggest your ejaculations are premature as Phil
Askey describes it as 'p_l_a_s_t_i_c' in DPReview.com, and
Steves-Digicams.com describes it as "Die-cast aluminum chassis, aluminum top
cover, polycarbonate". It's just not fair, is it Rich!

Nigel

"Rich" wrote in message
...
I thought it was too much to hope for, given it's $999 kit street
price, but when I saw the images, I knew it wasn't plastic!

Even if it's made of gold it's poxy, and still an olympus.

Sad, if it's true. I wonder why the guy who actually got to use the
thing thought it
was magnesium? Has DP review even had the camera "in hand?"

In oups.com,
RichA scribed:
Sad, if it's true. I wonder why the guy who actually got to use the
thing thought it
was magnesium? Has DP review even had the camera "in hand?"

Yikes! I can't wait to see the replies you're (hopefully) gonna get to that
remark. :-)

Nigel