Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/03/27
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Jack Campin wrote: > > I think I've asked this question before but it's always puzzled me. I use > screw-mount Leicas among many other cameras, and I've looked through quite > a lot of viewfinders. I wear glasses, and I've by FAR the best viewfinders > I've used are the Leitz 35mm and 50mm brightline finders. The difference > in brightness between them and any Japanese or Russian finder I've tried is > so huge that I'm not at all surprised at the premium prices they go for. > > But: why does that difference exist? The later black brightline finders by Nikon and Canon are COMPARABLE to the Leitz brightline, but still not as good. Surprisingly, the late black square Russian 20mm finders are superb, almost as good as the Leitz but at a fraction of the cost--although they are not brightline. I have no proof of it, but I would guess that your answer is just economics. As Canon and Nikon sold less and less RF bodies, they invested less and less in those products. Certainly they could have equaled or even surpassed the Leitz finders, but the financial incentive to justify the investment was just not there. Perhaps the classic example of Sales Vs Investment was the prototype Nikon SPX in 1959. It had TTL metering and a zoom 35-135 finder, but it was not produced because Nikon believed that SLRs--not RFs--were the future. Time has proven them right. Stephen Gandy