Re: [Leica] Country of origin Smoke Screens

[khmiska <khmiska@umich.edu>]

Stephen,
Wow. Finally somebody on my frequency. I'm new to the Leica game and therefore know
nothing about the pompous Mr. Puts. Who is he? Is he a PR flak?, Leica lobbyist? an
optical engineer? a mechanical engineer? a manufacturing engineer? Who has endowed
him with all this "wisdom?" Why does nearly everyone on the LUG bow, scrape and
a**k*** him? Can someone enlighten me?
Cordially,
Kurt Miska
German Business Translations
Ann Arbor, Michigan


Stephen Gandy wrote:

> Well Erwin, it amazes me how maintain your objectivity  and even handedness,
> when I see it as anything but when the subject turns to Leica.
>
> Have you EVER made ANY post on the LUG about a current Leica product which did
> not support Leica management in the best possible light ?   Objectivity  would
> seem to demand that at some point in time you would have to find something
> negative, most other LUGers have at some point or another.   Any post of yours
> referring to Leica problems that I can remember has only amounted to a
> disgruntled acknowledgment after many posts have made whatever problem common
> knowledge.  Remember the arguments we had a few years ago when you claimed there
> was no reasonable proof the lagging  R8 sales affected Leica's financials?  I
> do, it still makes me laugh whenever I see an R8.
>
>  I don't know if you are on Leica's payroll, but if you deserve to be,  since
> your unending praise of new products and lenses probably sells more product than
> Leica's often inept advertising.    I give thanks your lens tests don't talk
> about exceedingly fine detail in Che's beard.
>
> I don't think the real  issue here is Country of Origin with you at all, but
> your attempt at  PR damage control.
>
> If it became generally known how much of the M6 is made outside of Germany,
> sales might lag.  Older used cameras might be preferred to the new.    I think
> that is what you are worried about.     For some reason you seem to have a blind
> devotion to Leica management, defending their decisions and promoting their
> products -- even if their decisions and products don't deserve it.
>
> Some will doubtless believe your Leica promotional mindset  and unflinching
> Leica management loyalty has nothing to do with your dependence upon Leica's
> good will to provide you with information and test products for the CD's,
> articles, and books you want to sell.    I am not one of them.
>
> In my opinion the biggest smoke screen on the LUG is you Erwin, often fooling
> people into believing you are detached and objective in your Leica posts.  I
> think the best solution for everyone would be Leica making  you an official paid
> spokesman.   You would then be able to quote official Leica positions as a Leica
> employee, and I wouldn't be bothered about your painful lack of objectivity
> since there would never be any question that you have any objectivity.
>
> Stephen Gandy
>
>  Erwin Puts wrote:
>
> > The current discussion about the country of origin of the M6 and the
> > additional value this information might have for the consumer, that is
> > user/buyer of the camera, can be approached from different perspectives.
> > I fully agree with Ted and others who argue that the CoO is irrelevant for
> > the process of taking photographs. If the camera functions as specified and
> > delivers the goods, what extra info can be gleaned from the fact that the
> > camera is made in Portugal, Solms or Dresden? Nothing at all. THis is the
> > same as the obsession with the manufacturer of the glass, that is used in
> > Leica lenses. Is a Leica lens less worth when it has glass. manufactured by
> > Hoya (Japan), Corning (France) or Schott (Germany). And who is aware of the
> > fact  that many glass types from Schott are manufactured in Malaysia?
> > Is it then in the interest of the general consumer to know the CoO of every
> > part and the locations of the assembly and quality control? It would only
> > matter if you can claim that the origin of manufacture and/or assembly has a
> > statistically relevant impact on qulaity and quality assurance.
> > Bill has listed the origin of some of the parts and some of the assembly
> > locations. More could be added and presented in more detail.  But it is
> > indeed irrelevant. The consumer buys a product and pays for the quality. If
> > the shutter gears, according to original Solms specs should be made of
> > material X and be machined to a tolerance of a thousands of an inch and
> > checked to ensure it has these values, why should it be deemed important
> > where that check is done and who produces the steel for the gear? Most
> > socalled Swedish steel, used by Volvo and Saab (and in their advertising!),
> > is made in Holland at the Hoogovens plant in IJmuiden!
> > If one would dare to  presume that German workers generally do better than
> > their Portuguese collegues, I would challenge anyone to prove it or be
> > accused of xenophobia!
> > Knowing the meticulous quality and great pride of the Portuguese workers at
> > the Leica plant, I would sense it as very insulting that someone could
> > assume that these men mand women would be inferior to the mythical German
> > quality workers. And if fact: IT IS NOT TRUE!!!!!!
> > Portuguese quality is as good, if not better than German quality.
> > To answer the original  question: who would benefit from the knowledge of
> > the country of origin? It is the dealer of second hand cameras. If one could
> > say with certainty: Leica M6 cameras till serial number 1.234.567are Solms
> > made and after that production shifted to Portugal, I am sure that in an
> > instant those cameras with <#1.234.567 would be priced at a premium by any
> > dealer as being of higher value.
> > Just as has happened with M3 bodies with serial number above 1.100.000, that
> > are assumed to be the pinacle of mechanical Leica quality. I have NEVER read
> > any serious analysis, why this should be true and after numerous visits to
> > the factory, where  this question has been discussed in extenso, I still do
> > not know, nor does the factory itself. This is a myth that will benefit only
> > two parties: collectors and sellers.
> > And so does the info about the origin of production, (As Bill as
> > exemplified: a very vague concept in itself) of M6 bodies. The myth of any
> > superiority of production origin suits the seller and collector, not the
> > user. It might be useful to know the origin of a product if we know for sure
> > that there is a quality difference. But in the case of Portugal versus Solms
> > or Wetzlar, this difference does not exist and I challenge everyone to bring
> > conclusive proof of the contrary! Is it then in the interest of the consumer
> > to know the origin. From a view of playing games like Trival Pursuit: by all
> > means. From a consumer/user/buyer perspective: not relevant at all.
> > The "Made in ..." has an interesting origin. In the Industrial Age (around
> > 1870) British products were superior to anything made elsewhere. So when the
> > Germans started to manufacture industrial goods, the English forced them to
> > indicate the "made in germany" on their products as a sign of inferior
> > quality, as we westerners generally laughed at any product that had the sign
> > "made in Japan"  and we now are suspect when a product says "made in China".
> > Old habits never die. or so it seems. The alleged quality differences
> > between German and Canadian lenses. between Wetzlar and Solms M bodies,
> > between Solms and Portugal R bodies, between German and Japanese
> > manufactured lenses only serve one purpose: produce smoke screens to make
> > the consumer insecure!
> >
> > Erwin