Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/01/13
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]FWIW, the new Leica R 28-90 zoom is claimed to have an Mg barrel. Others might too, not sure. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Frank Dernie" <Frank.Dernie@btinternet.com> To: "Leica Users Group" <lug@leica-users.org> Sent: Friday, January 13, 2006 5:21 PM Subject: Re: Was RE: [Leica] DSLR choice - now Zeiss-Ikon > Hi Bill, > I agree with almost all you say apart from the materials aspect. I have > been designing racing cars for the last 30 years at the highest level > (mostly Formula 1but a Le Mans car and the current Lola CART car for > example) and I can assure you that if any company has produced a > magnesium alloy which has any saving grace other than lightness they are > keeping very quiet about it! I would not use magnesium for any part of a > camera. Polycarbonate is, particularly if fibre reinforced, a very much > superior material in terms of resilience toughness and weight for a > camera shell but is - yes you've got it - plastic so very difficult to > sell to non technical people who still see plastic as cheap. > I am not trying to run down the ZI or Leica and it does make lenses more > difficult to deal with for traditional techs not used to dealing with > high tech adhesives - disassembly needs carefully controlled heat etc.. I > could go on. > I really do thing magnesium is a poor choice of material for a camera > shell and would bet any money that it was the choice of the marketing > department not the design engineers because they knew customers would > prefer it. > Frank > > On 13 Jan, 2006, at 16:23, Bill Marshall wrote: > >> Hi, Frank - >> >> Great point about design. I agree with you 100%. But I don't think that >> this is an either/or question. BOTH high quality design AND high >> standards for QC yield longevity. And both have been a hallmark of Leica >> production for many years. When there have been exceptions - like the >> malfunctioning DX contacts on the M7, the faulty seals around the >> eyepiece on the M7, & the flare prone viewfinder of the M6 - it has made >> photography a lot less fun for the owners of these cameras no matter how >> long the camera lasted. For many of them, it didn't last long at all >> because they quickly sold them. >> >> But what does high quality design mean? I sat with a grizzled old >> independent Leica tech a few years ago - a man who had grown up in & >> been educated in Spain where he had earned a degree in engineering. He >> knows his stuff. He loves working on Leicas. In his opinion the devil is >> in the details. It's the little things that Leica does - its use of >> screws where other use glue or solder, its use of metal parts where >> others use plastic, etc. These are more durable & more repairable & the >> ability to repair a camera enables it to keep ticking for a long time as >> much as anything. It's Leica's attention to such small details as much >> that has made their longevity legendary in addition to its overall >> design. >> >> This brings us to the importance of materials. Everything you say about >> magnesium is true - which is why magnesium wasn't employed for this kind >> of use until recent years. The Zeiss Ikon does not use pure magnesium. >> It uses magnesium alloys which have only been developed in the past >> decade. In developing such alloys, engineers have solved the problems of >> corrosion with pure magnesium, which restricted its applications for >> many years. The emergence of magnesium alloys have allowed its virtues >> to emerge as well: excellent strength-to-weight ratio - among the best >> in the industry - & great elasticity for shock absorption - just what >> you need on a camera body. >> >> You dismiss magnesium as "cheap & light." If greater weight equalled >> higher quality, we'd all still be living in the Bronze Age. Doing the >> same job (i.e. strength) with a lighter weight material is an >> improvement & a sign of progress. At the very least, it provides an >> option for those who prefer a lighter weight camera (ZI = 16 oz) vs >> those who prefer one a little heavier (M6 = 19 oz) with a frame that is >> just as sturdy. Magnesium was actually a more expensive option in >> manufacturing until the recent development of alloys. Yes, it is now >> cheaper to use in molds than brass. How is this "cheapness" bad? If high >> quality results can be obtained at lower cost, saving money for the >> consumer, isn't this a good thing? >> >> Let's not forget too that for all this discussion about magnesium vs >> brass - & zinc on the M6 & later M4-P's - that this is only the outer >> cladding. The real structural integrity of the body comes from its >> internal chasis, which is die-cast aluminum in both the M7 & the ZI. >> Let's not forget either that all companies strive to economize. Leica >> did so on the M4-2, the lightest Leica at 18 oz. They introduced zinc >> top plates on late production samples of the M4-P & made them standard >> on the M6. They replaced the use of screws on the front elements of some >> lenses with glue. These are economies that I know of. My Leica tech >> friend probably knows of more because he takes them apart & I don't. >> However, Leica is restricted from making any changes on the M-cameras >> that are too radical by their "traditionalist" customer base - which is >> why they have returned to brass for the M7 & MP. However, Zeiss design >> engineers have had the freedom to think outside the box. In choosing >> modern magnesium alloys, they may just have come up with an elegant >> solution to the same problem that Leica engineers have but are limited >> in trying any new materials. >> >> If you think that any of the above isn't true, take a look at the spec's >> for a Leica R8 or R9. If brass is synonymous with high quality, why is >> Leica using a zinc top plate & a "fiber-glass reinforced polycarbonate >> bottom plate with an aluminum tripod plate"? Polycarbonate? Isn't that >> plastic? >> >> Lest I overstate the virtues of the ZI, let me say in closing that the >> M7 is a better camera than the ZI. It has more featurews & it is built >> to a higher standard. For that much higher a price tag, it should be. >> But that doesn't mean that the ZI isn't built to a high quality standard >> in its own right - just not the same standard as a Leica M, which is no >> slight. Use of words like "rubbish" & "cheap" in reference to the >> materials & build quality of the ZI are simply not accurate & are at a >> minimum very misleading. >> >> Bill >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.14.17/228 - Release Date: > 12/01/2006 > >