Re: Ein Madchen's Opinion

["Henning J. Wulff" <henningw@archiphoto.com>]

Joy to the World announced:

>     Is anyone foolish enough to believe that autos, watches, wearing apparel
>&
>cameras of today are made to the same quality standards of earlier years when
>there was pride in workmanship.  They probably all perform better than their
>precedents but they are not built to last.  Cheap Chinese quartz watches
>often
>keep better time than Rolex & Patek Phillipe of the past;  same with sound
>speakers that had massive magnets & heavy solid walnut cabinets.
>      In this plastic age, most appliances (including Leicas) have much
>better
>performance than their predecessors but who cares? >I DO!<  When I buy Leica
>I expect the service & expertise of which Leica built its reputation.
>     My M6 does not take any better pictures than my IIIf, BUT I DO. because
>it
>is easier to use & has a great meter (if your battery isnt dead).  Would HCBs


Well.... Let us start with cars. I've had a lot of cars, and remember many
my dad had. Without the slightest doubt today's cars, in spite of their
vastly greater complexity are also vastly more reliable, and of higher
quality on top of the performance, safety, efficiency and comfort
advantages they enjoy. There _were_ higher quality cars in the fifties, and
there _are_ low quality cars today, but overall the advances have been
huge, and not just if the 'Prince of Darkness' held sway over the electrics
in your Anglomobile.

Watches. I have a couple of Rolexes, an old Omega, an old Tudor, and, among
others, some electronic watches made by Seiko and Citizen, as well as some
European quartz watches. One of the Rolexes has been in for repair
regularly every 5 years or so because some threads on a lock-down stem wear
out. The Omega has been in the shop about 5 times over the last 30 years.
The Tudor has been in the shop twice. The quartz watches (up to 20 years
old) have needed batteries. A Citizen watch I had I threw away, not because
it was not repairable, but because the repair would have cost almost 25
percent of the repair cost of the Rolex, and so wasn't worth it. The quartz
watches have demonstrated to me a much higher degree of reliability than
the mechanical watches. The Rolex Submariner will outlast almost everything
else I own (not necessarily in working condition), but so would anything
else with as thick a case of high quality steel. Gold Rolexes will not last
as long (unless kept in a safe or jewelry box).

Massiveness, and other examples of adding strength to a part in the past
was not usually a sign of greater build quality, but rather a sign of not
understanding materials and the stresses that they are subjected to as well
as we do now. It is not necessary to have a Summicron 50 weigh as much as
the old DR for it to be considered well-built. If you extrapolate the same
sort of design philosophy to many of taday's products, using a 600/4 lens
would be, literally, a team effort.
Intelligent use of modern materials and design give us a Summicron 50 today
that is a lot lighter, and is more durable in at least one of the
components that matters most, namely the coatings. Whether the mount will
last as long will have to be decided by our grandchildren.

This 'service and expertise' of Leitz' in the past was not that hot. I
finally sold my IIIg and Ig cameras in the sixties because Leica couldn't
get them working reliably, after they had been out of my hands for a total
of over 6 months. That wasn't service or expertise, that was crap.

My M6's have, all in all, been the most reliable Leicas I've had.
However... the most reliable 35mm cameras I've had were some Konica
Autoreflex cameras that I used heavily between 1969 and 1980. Not one
repair or adjustment was ever made or required. Optical performance was
excellent, and I shot Leica and Konica together on many occasions. Some of
the photos on my web site were taken with Konica. Leicas undoubtedly look
and feel better built, but given that during the period I used Konicas a
lot my Leicas were in the shop at least once every three years each, Konica
Autoreflexes were undoubtedly the more reliable camera. BTW, the Nikons
I've had since Konica gave up on SLR's have not been quite as reliable.

So, to wind up this drivelling tirade....I'm firmly convinced that most
manufactured goods today are made to as high a qualitative standard
(However you define that, except as pure mass) as things before. Some
things are made cheaply and poorly now, but more stuff was made that way in
the past. Fortunately, most of that stuff has broken and worn out and has
been tossed. Only the good stuff remains from the past, but that is not
representative.

One of my businesses is architecture, and I hear constantly about the
wonderful buildings of the  past. Face it. The good stuff from the past has
been saved and polished up. The bad stuff fell down, has been torn down,
has been renovated 18 times, or has had huge trees planted in front. Old
ugly stuff has not survived. New ugly stuff will be treated the same
eventually.

So today I'm going up in a plane to take some aerials with my super
reliable Mamiya 645, and later I'm going to take some pictures with my
somewhat more cranky Sinar, and I'll have an even slightly more cranky M6
along to take pictures for the joy of taking pictures, as I find that a
higher percentage of Leica shots are 'keepers' than those taken with most
other 35mm cameras.


   *           Henning J. Wulff
  /|\     Wulff Photography & Design
 /###\      henningw@archiphoto.com
 |[ ]|     http://www.archiphoto.com