[rollei_list] Re: Capa's Cameras

Without wanting to take issue in any way with your knowledge of history, I can 
assert, from and engineering standpoint, that a copy of something as complex as 
a Sonnar lens could be either worse or better than the original. Nippon Kogaku 
was a capable optical company. If, in their analysis of the Sonnar designs they 
had available, they were able to achieve either higher precision or better 
thermal compensation, examples of their copies could produce consistently 
superior results than a less precise example of the same design.
OTOH one of the best pors of my acquaintance, now retired, used to hand select 
his nikkors at the importers and told me there was very considerable sample 
variation.
The complex and inexpensively made plastic lenses of today suffer from extreme 
sample variation too. Luckily for the manufacturers most users are not that 
discriminating.
Frank



----- Original Message ----
From: Marc James Small <marcsmall@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Saturday, 26 September, 2009 3:32:44 AM
Subject: [rollei_list] Re: Capa's Cameras

At 03:49 PM 9/25/2009, Carlos Manuel Freaza wrote:
>Marc, this is part of the article quoting New York Times, Life, US Army, etc.:
>
>Encounter with "LIFE" Photographers
>One day in June 1950, David Douglas DUNCAN, a staff photographer for
>"LIFE," Horace BRISTOL of "FORTUNE," and MIKI, Jun who was actively
>working at "LIFE" as the only Japanese contract photographer there,
>visited our Ohi Plant.
>In reference to their visit, MIKI wrote an article entitled "Nikkor
>and I" in the "Nikkor Club Quarterly magazine No. 26" (issued on
>November 30, 1963), as follows :
>

Carlos

Don't waste your time copying tripe like this.  It is ALL BS.  Untrue.  These 
evaluations and tests were cooked so that the Photo Editors would permit their 
photographers to use Canon and Nikon lenses.  They were not valid tests.  These 
tests were repeated in the US by several independent labs and, more 
significantly, by Zeiss and Leitz, and no distinctions at all could be found.  
Zeiss even had made the US tests part of the lawsuit the Allied Control 
Commission refused to allow it to file.

Yes, the Nikon and Canon folks have been making much of these faked tests for 
six decades but a faked test is a faked test, and all of the advertising hype 
will not improve the performance of a lens.

And answer the central point:  how can an exact copy using the same materials 
and built to the same standards exceed the original in performance.  Riddle me 
that one, Batman!

Marc


msmall@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Cha robh bàs fir gun ghràs fir!

---
Rollei List

- Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

- Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org

- Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org

- Online, searchable archives are available at
http://www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
---
Rollei List

- Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

- Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org

- Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org

- Online, searchable archives are available at
http://www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list

Other related posts: