Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/08/09
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Clive, You make some interesting points. I have agonized over the obsolence Canon built into their SLR's when they switch from manual focus FD bodies and lenses to the autofocus EOS series. Unlike Nikon, their old FD lenses were instantly obsolete with their latest bodies. My agony became even greater with the release of EOS mount DSLR's. Photographers with old Leica and Pentax lenses could mount them on EOS bodies with only a simple adapter. Those of us with a bag full of FD stuff were SOL. However, Canon maintained that this was not done as deliberate, planned obsolence. To provide superior performance with their new autofocus lenses, they felt it necessary to greatly enlarge the size of the mount and its location in reference to the film (or sensor) plane. Is this true? I think so -- look at Canon's past dominance in the professional photo market with arguably the quietest, fast focusing automatic lens system available. I believe this is an example as you would say, "a passion to improve the product", not built in obsolescence. Regards, Rob McClure On Aug 9, 2007, at 3:06 AM, Clive Moss wrote: > Nonsense. I still use Canon LTM lenses on my M8. > I can use almost almost every Nikon SLR lens on my D200. > Obsolescence is in the mind of the buyer, not the manufacturer. > It is a really stupid company that decides not to incorporate the best > available technology in their products. American and many European > automobile manufacturers and German camera manufacturers are the most > obvious examples. The fact that new technology makes previous > products "obsolescent" does not mean that the old products don't > perform as they always performed. It simply means that the new > products perform better. Leica ASPH lenses come to mind. Did Leica > build obsolescence into their lenses so that they could be replaced by > ASPH lenses? > Only the fashion industry (led by France and Italy it seems) builds in > obsolescence. > The only way to build obsolescence into a non-fashion product is to > build products with old technology when superior technology is already > practical - or to build products that wear out before the buyer > expects them to stop functioning - which Japanese manufacturers like > Nikon and Canon etc have never done, AFAIK. > The "built in obsolescence" that you refer to is driven by a passion > to improve the product - something that Leica has demonstrated in its > lenses, but rarely in its bodies. The last few years have seen Leica > driven by the fashion industry. I hope the new management will change > this. > -- > Clive Moss > http://clive.moss.net/blog > > > > On Aug 8, 2007, at Aug 8, 8:51 PM, Joseph Low wrote: > >> Gentlemen >> >> Built in obsolescence has been the credo of Japanese manufacturers >> since >> the >> Industrial revolution followiig WWII > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > Rob McClure Upper Sandusky, OH