Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/09/26

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] vs Zeiss/ 16 X 20s
From: Claes Bjerner <claes.bjerner@pi.se>
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 98 16:39:42 +0100

Bud Cook wrote:

>My point is that many of the lenses designed for Kyocera are designed to
>a lower price point and might be less robust than the Zeiss lenses (or
>Leitz lenses) that I've owned in the past and which date back to my
>first 35mm camera, a (real) Contax IIa.
>
>When a Kyocera/Zeiss lens sells for less than an American made Carl
>Zeiss *economy* rifle scope, something's got to be sacrificed.  A
>difference in labor costs can't account for it.

What do you really mean with "something has to be sacrificed", Bud?

Are you not simply a bit prejudiced against the Japanese? Why should 
their production not be more efficient and therefor cheaper? BTW, today 
there is certainly no difference in labor cost! And as far as quality 
control and final perfection go, you can safely leave that to Zeiss and 
Leitz. They seem to trust the Japanese more than you do, Bud.

Claes