Olympus OM-D-E-M1 II vs OM-D-E-M10 II
Jul 15, 2018 14:54:05 #
rcarol wrote:
I kind of think that it's weird that you presume I own this camera.
Well, why wouldn’t I assume that you have the camera the thread is about? Otherwise why post in the thread?
The least you could do is have th correct info if you are going to get involved.
Jul 15, 2018 15:08:07 #
tdekany wrote:
Well, why wouldn’t I assume that you have the camera the thread is about? Otherwise why post in the thread?
The least you could do is have th correct info if you are going to get involved.
The least you could do is have th correct info if you are going to get involved.
I used the term "about". What is it that you don't understand regarding "about"?
Jul 15, 2018 15:10:24 #
azted
Loc: Las Vegas, NV.
moonhawk wrote:
E-M1 is weather sealed, M-10 is not. That may or may not matter to you. I believe the E-M5 is also weather sealed, but i don't own one and am not sure. The m-1 is built to take a lot of abuse, something I take advantage of.
Yes, EM-5 is weather sealed. For the OP, it stands to reason that the M-1 will give better results than the M-10, but you have to ask yourself: Am I able to get the better results out of the equipment???
Jul 15, 2018 15:30:38 #
Linda From Maine wrote:
"Average" covers a lot, and purchasing n... (show quote)
Thank you for your comments and the reference. Peter
Jul 15, 2018 15:32:51 #
Gort55 wrote:
I own both cameras — only Mark I versions. I dont see any difference in image quality. the EM 1 has more buttons and a better grip. It is easier to change settings on the EM1.
Thank you for your comments. Peter
Jul 15, 2018 15:33:56 #
rcarol wrote:
I used the term "about". What is it that you don't understand regarding "about"?
When you set the exposer on your camera, do you set it correctly or about. Or do you not have a camera? I need to be careful with you and can’t assume anything photography wise.
To put it another way, when you worked for someone, were you told exactly what you were going to make at the end of the week, or were you told that you were going to make ABOUT this much or that much.
And if the answer was that you were going to make ***ABOUT*** so much, would you had been ok with that? Would you not had thought that that was somewhat of a weird reply?
rcarol, the least you can do is to make sure that the info you are going to provide is CORRECT. Is it that hard to google? Or are you that busy?
Jul 15, 2018 15:40:47 #
tdekany wrote:
When you set the exposer on your camera, do you se... (show quote)
We can only hope that you are as accurate when filling out your tax forms as you profess to be regarding other issues. And by the way, since I had my own business I always took home "about" the same amount of money each week. And regarding exposure, mine are always "about" since there is no one and only one correct exposure. But I do agree, you really do need to be careful with me.
Jul 15, 2018 15:52:08 #
rcarol wrote:
We can only hope that you are as accurate when filling out your tax forms as you profess to be regarding other issues. And by the way, since I had my own business I always took home "about" the same amount of money each week. And regarding exposure, mine are always "about" since there is no one and only one correct exposure. But I do agree, you really do need to be careful with me.
You sound like you never admit being wrong. Knew it after your first reply. Adios!
PS: there is always a CORRECT exposer. How do you not know that? Jesus.
Jul 15, 2018 15:53:32 #
Jul 15, 2018 15:55:31 #
moonhawk wrote:
Put them back in your pants, guys...Nobody cares.
You should. At least on a photo forum, we should have our numbers right. At least.
Jul 15, 2018 15:58:13 #
I don't rely on photo forums for any information that is important to me. The guy misspoke and admitted it. Give it a rest. Have you never given inaccurate info by mistake? I doubt it.
Jul 15, 2018 16:35:12 #
moonhawk wrote:
I don't rely on photo forums for any information that is important to me. The guy misspoke and admitted it. Give it a rest. Have you never given inaccurate info by mistake? I doubt it.
Keep moving will you, no one asked your opinion. In case you didn’t k ow, people do come here for accurate info.
Jul 15, 2018 16:39:17 #
Well, despite your admirable efforts as the Truth Police, they don't always get it, do they? They should double check with authoritative sources. Like manufacturers.
Sorry somebody pissed in your cornflakes this morning. It wasn't me, I promise.
Sorry somebody pissed in your cornflakes this morning. It wasn't me, I promise.
Jul 15, 2018 16:41:08 #
tdekany wrote:
Keep moving will you, no one asked your opinion. In case you didn’t k ow, people do come here for accurate info.
Frankly speaking, nobody asked for your opinion either but that didn't stop you from giving it.
Jul 15, 2018 16:41:12 #
moonhawk wrote:
Well, despite your admirable efforts as the Truth Police, they don't always get it, do they? They should double check with authoritative sources. Like manufacturers.
Sorry somebody pissed in your cornflakes this morning. It wasn't me, I promise.
Sorry somebody pissed in your cornflakes this morning. It wasn't me, I promise.
That was my whole point. To not give out incorrect info, which he did. When pointed out he had an attitude about it
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.