Not even that actually....in other small compacts I have i can actually see a slight movement in the lens area.
I guess I'll actually have to burn a test roll.... oh well. Thanks for the input!!
I just shot a test roll with an Olumpus XA3 and was very favorably impressed. Sample:View attachment 159794
Are you sure about that?MCM, there are TWO meters in an XA-- one feeds the display, the other exposes the film. One or the other can be wrong, but it's better to have the display meter off of course.
I've heard this before. I could only see evidence of one in the repair manual, but the shutter and needle definitely work independently.Are you sure about that?
Where are the 2 meters located? I can only see one.
Thanks!
Yeah that's really the Olympus way. They did the same thing for the Olympus OM-2. 2 metering circuits one for display and 1 for the exposure.
Are you sure about that?
Where are the 2 meters located? I can only see one.
Thanks!
Describing the camera as having "two meters" may be a bit of a semantic subtlety. The camera has one meter, in the sense that a meter has a D'Arsonval type movement, an indicator, and a scale for the indicator to be referenced against. This is the meter that is visible in the display of the XA, and it has nothing to do with the exposure of the camera. As the XA has an electronic shutter, there is a separate circuit that sets the exposure. This is why an XA can give perfect exposures when the meter display is wrong. This is apparently a pretty common problem as my XA has this same issue and I've seen it mentioned a number of times thru the years.
This is not the same as the OM-2. The 2 (and the 4's) do have two sets of photocells; one drives the meter visible in the viewfinder and also indicates the approximate exposure that will be used in auto mode. But once the shutter is fired the second cells take over as part of Oly's ingenious OTF (Off The Film) system. This reads the actual amount of light hitting the film and keeps the shutter open until the proper exposure is achieved.
Then, would you be so kind as to prove what you said by showing where the 2 cells are located, preferably in a schematic from the factory, please?The XA has photocell the drive the galvanometer and 1 photocell that controls exposure time.
Then, would you be so kind as to prove what you said by showing where the 2 cells are located, preferably in a schematic from the factory, please?
As I said above, only the original -2 and the -2n have 2 blue SPD cells on the bottom for the Auto exposure and 2 (CDS on the -2, there are reports the -2N has SPD cells) cells next to the viewfinder for the viewfinder and Manual exposure.
So, yeap, that's 4 cells!
Then, would you be so kind as to prove what you said by showing where the 2 cells are located, preferably in a schematic from the factory, please?
As I said above, only the original -2 and the -2n have 2 blue SPD cells on the bottom for the Auto exposure and 2 (CDS on the -2, there are reports the -2N has SPD cells) cells next to the viewfinder for the viewfinder and Manual exposure.
So, yeap, that's 4 cells!
I don't. Where did you get the idea?Why do you think it's possible to control exposure automatically without a light measuring circuit?
Thanks! That clarifies it.
I don't. Where did you get the idea?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?