Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/04/25
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]At 05:56 PM 4/25/97 -0400, Marc wrote: >At 02:25 PM 4/25/97 PST, David wrote: <<I have heard some say that Nikon lenses were better than Leica or Contax >lenses but >this is the first time to hear that Nikon rangefinders were >much better made than Leica.>> > >Since Nippon Kogaku stole -- took without payment -- the designs of the >best lenses of Zeiss and Leitz, their optics may be comparable, but are >hardly "better", any more than a Kiev II is "better" than a Contax II. > The same thing is sometimes better, sometimes worse, depending if you are buying, selling, or using. We all know that the Japanese are very very good at copying technology. Whenever you "copy" something, it's usually easy to add to it to make it appear better. Better, however, is rarely the case. Recently, one of the Japanese Ministers announced that Japan was going to push for educating the Japanese industries to become more inventive and innovative. Instead of copying, they want to become inventive. My personal opinion is that this may take generations and a major culture change. I don't believe this will happen. Jim