Re: Camera bodies & pricing

[P3D <ronald-beck@xxxxxx>]

photo-3d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx said:
> You could pay more (LOTS more) for a Nikon or Canon body, but why? 
> After all, it is the lens that mostly determines the quality of the 
> picture; the body is ultimately only responsible for exposure.  The 
> rest is features and ergonomics, and I find nothing wrong with either 
> of these on the Ricoh/RBTX2.  The KR-10M is obviously a highly under- 
> valued camera; I think RBT made a very shrewd decision in using them. 

Why?  Well, for one, from my experiences, the Nikon body is built like a 
tank (a Realist?).  And, as a professional journalist photographer, you'd 
probably want something that will stand up to a few bangs, bruises and 
falls and still reliably take the photo.

Now, I've been perfectly happy with my Konica FT-1 with it's built in 
autowind, electronic synch cord and manual focusing.  I also like the 
shutter priority (set shutter speed & apature setting is automatically 
selected).  It's also been pretty rugged in the ten or so years I've owned 
it.  In fact, it's probably the best camera to twin, however it's no 
longer manufactured.

Still, a lot of the newer cameras I've looked at these days seem fairly 
fragile and I'd be afraid of what might happen if I dropped one of them or 
banged it up against a wall.

So, think about these things too when choosing a camera(s) for your use.

Ron


------------------------------