View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
hifisapi
Joined: 25 Sep 2012 Posts: 941 Location: USA
|
Posted: Fri Oct 26, 2012 5:23 pm Post subject: Short lived Lens lines |
|
|
hifisapi wrote:
My pride and joy when it comes to lenses are the original Pentax K mount SMC PENTAX(-K) lenses from the mid 70's.
They are somewhat hard to find because they were only made three years 1975-1976-1977 and were
then superseded for the most part by the smaller SMC PENTAX-M series starting in 1978. This is somewhat unusual.
Does anybody know of any other major lens series that was only made for 3 years ( or less )? Seems like poor
anticipation of the marketplace to tool up and then discontinue so quick. _________________ ===========
ACQUIRED OVER 30 YEARS:
Cameras: DSLR=Pentax istDS FILM=Pentax SP, SP-F, ESII, SP1000, KX, K2
Lenses : Pentax M42 = Super Multi Coated Takumars 50/1.4 55/1.8 100/4-BELLOWS 500/4.5 1000/8 135-600/6.7 Pentax PK= SMC Pentax-Ks K17/4-FF Fisheye K18/3.5 K20/4 K24/3.5 K28/3.5 K28/2 K35/3.5 K35/2 K50/1.2 K50/1.4K 50/4-MACROK 55/1.8 K85/1.8 K100/4-MACRO K100/4-BELLOWS K105/2.8 K120/2.8 K135/3.5 K135/2.5 K150/4 K200/4 K400/5.6 K45-125/4K 85-210/4.5 Pentax PKM = SMC Pentax-M M40/2.8-Pancake M50/1.4 M75-150/4 M80-200/4.5 Pentax PKA= SMC Pentax-A A15/3.5 A50/2.8-MACRO A28/2 A35/2 A50/1.4 A135/2.8 A200/4 A*300/4 A35-105/3.5 A24-50/4 A70-210/4 TAMRON AD2= SP80-200/2.8 SP180/2.5 TOKINA AT-X PK= ATX28-85/3.5-4.5 ATX35-70/2.8 ATX60-120/2.8 ATX80-200/2.8 ATX100-300/4 ATX90/2.5 MACRO KIRON-LESTER DINE PK = 105/2.8-MACRO VIVITAR PK = 135/2.8-MACRO 28-85/4 NOFLEXAR AUTOBELLOWS PK = 60/4 105/4 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Oreste
Joined: 08 Sep 2012 Posts: 451
|
Posted: Fri Oct 26, 2012 5:49 pm Post subject: Re: Short lived Lens lines |
|
|
Oreste wrote:
hifisapi wrote: |
My pride and joy when it comes to lenses are the original Pentax K mount SMC PENTAX(-K) lenses from the mid 70's.
They are somewhat hard to find because they were only made three years 1975-1976-1977 and were
then superseded for the most part by the smaller SMC PENTAX-M series starting in 1978. This is somewhat unusual.
Does anybody know of any other major lens series that was only made for 3 years ( or less )? Seems like poor
anticipation of the marketplace to tool up and then discontinue so quick. |
I don't see that this is particularly unusual. Most companies replace their lenses when they can. Leica, Nikon and others regularly update their lens lines, often with a view to making them smaller and lighter.
180mm Elmarit-R (1967)
180mm Elmarit-R (1979) much smaller and lighter
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
hifisapi
Joined: 25 Sep 2012 Posts: 941 Location: USA
|
Posted: Fri Oct 26, 2012 6:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
hifisapi wrote:
But with Pentax there was a degradation in optical and mechanical quality when they went smaller. It wasnt an across the board "improvement" like in some cases. In your example the later lens probably is superior optically and better coatings.
This aint what happened with the pentax M series. _________________ ===========
ACQUIRED OVER 30 YEARS:
Cameras: DSLR=Pentax istDS FILM=Pentax SP, SP-F, ESII, SP1000, KX, K2
Lenses : Pentax M42 = Super Multi Coated Takumars 50/1.4 55/1.8 100/4-BELLOWS 500/4.5 1000/8 135-600/6.7 Pentax PK= SMC Pentax-Ks K17/4-FF Fisheye K18/3.5 K20/4 K24/3.5 K28/3.5 K28/2 K35/3.5 K35/2 K50/1.2 K50/1.4K 50/4-MACROK 55/1.8 K85/1.8 K100/4-MACRO K100/4-BELLOWS K105/2.8 K120/2.8 K135/3.5 K135/2.5 K150/4 K200/4 K400/5.6 K45-125/4K 85-210/4.5 Pentax PKM = SMC Pentax-M M40/2.8-Pancake M50/1.4 M75-150/4 M80-200/4.5 Pentax PKA= SMC Pentax-A A15/3.5 A50/2.8-MACRO A28/2 A35/2 A50/1.4 A135/2.8 A200/4 A*300/4 A35-105/3.5 A24-50/4 A70-210/4 TAMRON AD2= SP80-200/2.8 SP180/2.5 TOKINA AT-X PK= ATX28-85/3.5-4.5 ATX35-70/2.8 ATX60-120/2.8 ATX80-200/2.8 ATX100-300/4 ATX90/2.5 MACRO KIRON-LESTER DINE PK = 105/2.8-MACRO VIVITAR PK = 135/2.8-MACRO 28-85/4 NOFLEXAR AUTOBELLOWS PK = 60/4 105/4 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
themoleman342
Joined: 21 Oct 2007 Posts: 2190 Location: East Coast (CT), U.S.A.
Expire: 2013-01-24
|
Posted: Fri Oct 26, 2012 6:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
themoleman342 wrote:
I don't understand the elmarit example. A 12 year production life of one lens is not the same as 3 for an entire series. Just an excuse to mention Leica again?
Many things can explain why lenses are discontinued. Cost of production could be the answer to this one. M series lenses are generally considered to be made with lower quality materials. Maybe Pentax at this time thought the amateur market they were trying to target would appreciate more compact, lighter designs. Because many of the K series designs were borrowed from earlier m42 lenses, maybe many did not believe Pentax was advancing in any big way. The M series look different so in terms of marketing it could represent
"advancement." |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Oreste
Joined: 08 Sep 2012 Posts: 451
|
Posted: Fri Oct 26, 2012 6:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Oreste wrote:
themoleman342 wrote: |
I don't understand the elmarit example. A 12 year production life of one lens is not the same as 3 for an entire series. Just an excuse to mention Leica again?
Many things can explain why lenses are discontinued. Cost of production could be the answer to this one. M series lenses are generally considered to be made with lower quality materials. Maybe Pentax at this time thought the amateur market they were trying to target would appreciate more compact, lighter designs. Because many of the K series designs were borrowed from earlier m42 lenses, maybe many did not believe Pentax was advancing in any big way. The M series look different so in terms of marketing it could represent
"advancement." |
I was pointing out that making lenses smaller and lighter does not necessarily mean they are worse. The second Elmarit is indeed a superior lens. Nikon did the same thing with many of their lenses. I [picked the 180mm Elmarit as an example because the second version is much smaller and lighter, and it is perhaps the most striking redesign of all time, as far as paring off the weight and size are concerned. The original version weighs 1325gr; the second weighs only 850 gr!
The 1967 Nikkor 20mm f/3.5
The 1977 20mm f/3.5:
Last edited by Oreste on Fri Oct 26, 2012 6:57 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
hifisapi
Joined: 25 Sep 2012 Posts: 941 Location: USA
|
Posted: Fri Oct 26, 2012 6:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
hifisapi wrote:
Oreste wrote: |
themoleman342 wrote: |
I don't understand the elmarit example. A 12 year production life of one lens is not the same as 3 for an entire series. Just an excuse to mention Leica again?
Many things can explain why lenses are discontinued. Cost of production could be the answer to this one. M series lenses are generally considered to be made with lower quality materials. Maybe Pentax at this time thought the amateur market they were trying to target would appreciate more compact, lighter designs. Because many of the K series designs were borrowed from earlier m42 lenses, maybe many did not believe Pentax was advancing in any big way. The M series look different so in terms of marketing it could represent
"advancement." |
I was pointing out that making lenses smaller and lighter does not necessarily mean they are worse. The second Elmarit is indeed a superior lens. Nikon did the same thing with many of their lenses.
The 1967 Nikkor 20mm f/3.5
The 1977 20mm f/3.5:
|
I get your point, sometimes there is progress, but they didnt do it in only 3 years, they waited 10 years on your example. What Im getting at is the smc pentax K series was brand new in 1975 and then was replaced for the most part in 1978. Thats a short run. _________________ ===========
ACQUIRED OVER 30 YEARS:
Cameras: DSLR=Pentax istDS FILM=Pentax SP, SP-F, ESII, SP1000, KX, K2
Lenses : Pentax M42 = Super Multi Coated Takumars 50/1.4 55/1.8 100/4-BELLOWS 500/4.5 1000/8 135-600/6.7 Pentax PK= SMC Pentax-Ks K17/4-FF Fisheye K18/3.5 K20/4 K24/3.5 K28/3.5 K28/2 K35/3.5 K35/2 K50/1.2 K50/1.4K 50/4-MACROK 55/1.8 K85/1.8 K100/4-MACRO K100/4-BELLOWS K105/2.8 K120/2.8 K135/3.5 K135/2.5 K150/4 K200/4 K400/5.6 K45-125/4K 85-210/4.5 Pentax PKM = SMC Pentax-M M40/2.8-Pancake M50/1.4 M75-150/4 M80-200/4.5 Pentax PKA= SMC Pentax-A A15/3.5 A50/2.8-MACRO A28/2 A35/2 A50/1.4 A135/2.8 A200/4 A*300/4 A35-105/3.5 A24-50/4 A70-210/4 TAMRON AD2= SP80-200/2.8 SP180/2.5 TOKINA AT-X PK= ATX28-85/3.5-4.5 ATX35-70/2.8 ATX60-120/2.8 ATX80-200/2.8 ATX100-300/4 ATX90/2.5 MACRO KIRON-LESTER DINE PK = 105/2.8-MACRO VIVITAR PK = 135/2.8-MACRO 28-85/4 NOFLEXAR AUTOBELLOWS PK = 60/4 105/4 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
hifisapi
Joined: 25 Sep 2012 Posts: 941 Location: USA
|
Posted: Fri Oct 26, 2012 6:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
hifisapi wrote:
Also, on your Nikon 20mm example, I would prefer the metal focus grip on the 1967 version over the later rubber version as rubber has a bad habit of drying out over the years.... _________________ ===========
ACQUIRED OVER 30 YEARS:
Cameras: DSLR=Pentax istDS FILM=Pentax SP, SP-F, ESII, SP1000, KX, K2
Lenses : Pentax M42 = Super Multi Coated Takumars 50/1.4 55/1.8 100/4-BELLOWS 500/4.5 1000/8 135-600/6.7 Pentax PK= SMC Pentax-Ks K17/4-FF Fisheye K18/3.5 K20/4 K24/3.5 K28/3.5 K28/2 K35/3.5 K35/2 K50/1.2 K50/1.4K 50/4-MACROK 55/1.8 K85/1.8 K100/4-MACRO K100/4-BELLOWS K105/2.8 K120/2.8 K135/3.5 K135/2.5 K150/4 K200/4 K400/5.6 K45-125/4K 85-210/4.5 Pentax PKM = SMC Pentax-M M40/2.8-Pancake M50/1.4 M75-150/4 M80-200/4.5 Pentax PKA= SMC Pentax-A A15/3.5 A50/2.8-MACRO A28/2 A35/2 A50/1.4 A135/2.8 A200/4 A*300/4 A35-105/3.5 A24-50/4 A70-210/4 TAMRON AD2= SP80-200/2.8 SP180/2.5 TOKINA AT-X PK= ATX28-85/3.5-4.5 ATX35-70/2.8 ATX60-120/2.8 ATX80-200/2.8 ATX100-300/4 ATX90/2.5 MACRO KIRON-LESTER DINE PK = 105/2.8-MACRO VIVITAR PK = 135/2.8-MACRO 28-85/4 NOFLEXAR AUTOBELLOWS PK = 60/4 105/4 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Oreste
Joined: 08 Sep 2012 Posts: 451
|
Posted: Fri Oct 26, 2012 6:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Oreste wrote:
hifisapi wrote: |
Also, on your Nikon 20mm example, I would prefer the metal focus grip on the 1967 version over the later rubber version as rubber has a bad habit of drying out over the years.... |
Quite possibly true... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
fermy
Joined: 17 Feb 2012 Posts: 1974
|
Posted: Fri Oct 26, 2012 6:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
fermy wrote:
At the end of 70 many manufacturers got into cost saving race. Minolta too chopped off elements from some perfectly good lenses to make them cheaper and less good in MDIII series. 3 years for the series in the end of 70 is nothing special. Minolta MD I series was introduced in 77, replaced by MD II in 1978, replaced by MD III series in 1981. _________________ Many lenses and some film bodies for sale here: http://forum.mflenses.com/canon-fd-minolta-md-c-mounts-m42-pentax-and-more-t50465.html
Flickr http://www.flickr.com/photos/96060788@N06/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Oreste
Joined: 08 Sep 2012 Posts: 451
|
Posted: Fri Oct 26, 2012 6:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Oreste wrote:
fermy wrote: |
At the end of 70 many manufacturers got into cost saving race. Minolta too chopped off elements from some perfectly good lenses to make them cheaper and less good in MDIII series. 3 years for the series in the end of 70 is nothing special. Minolta MD I series was introduced in 77, replaced by MD II in 1978, replaced by MD III series in 1981. |
They were also feeling the heat from the cheapo lenses (Vivitar, etc). |
|
Back to top |
|
|
hifisapi
Joined: 25 Sep 2012 Posts: 941 Location: USA
|
Posted: Fri Oct 26, 2012 7:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
hifisapi wrote:
fermy wrote: |
At the end of 70 many manufacturers got into cost saving race. Minolta too chopped off elements from some perfectly good lenses to make them cheaper and less good in MDIII series. 3 years for the series in the end of 70 is nothing special. Minolta MD I series was introduced in 77, replaced by MD II in 1978, replaced by MD III series in 1981. |
Now Im thinking with high inflation and heavy pressure to reduce production costs, the smck series was probably cut short for cost reasons and that is why the smc-m series is not as high quality overall. _________________ ===========
ACQUIRED OVER 30 YEARS:
Cameras: DSLR=Pentax istDS FILM=Pentax SP, SP-F, ESII, SP1000, KX, K2
Lenses : Pentax M42 = Super Multi Coated Takumars 50/1.4 55/1.8 100/4-BELLOWS 500/4.5 1000/8 135-600/6.7 Pentax PK= SMC Pentax-Ks K17/4-FF Fisheye K18/3.5 K20/4 K24/3.5 K28/3.5 K28/2 K35/3.5 K35/2 K50/1.2 K50/1.4K 50/4-MACROK 55/1.8 K85/1.8 K100/4-MACRO K100/4-BELLOWS K105/2.8 K120/2.8 K135/3.5 K135/2.5 K150/4 K200/4 K400/5.6 K45-125/4K 85-210/4.5 Pentax PKM = SMC Pentax-M M40/2.8-Pancake M50/1.4 M75-150/4 M80-200/4.5 Pentax PKA= SMC Pentax-A A15/3.5 A50/2.8-MACRO A28/2 A35/2 A50/1.4 A135/2.8 A200/4 A*300/4 A35-105/3.5 A24-50/4 A70-210/4 TAMRON AD2= SP80-200/2.8 SP180/2.5 TOKINA AT-X PK= ATX28-85/3.5-4.5 ATX35-70/2.8 ATX60-120/2.8 ATX80-200/2.8 ATX100-300/4 ATX90/2.5 MACRO KIRON-LESTER DINE PK = 105/2.8-MACRO VIVITAR PK = 135/2.8-MACRO 28-85/4 NOFLEXAR AUTOBELLOWS PK = 60/4 105/4 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Lightshow
Joined: 04 Nov 2011 Posts: 3666 Location: Calgary
|
Posted: Sat Oct 27, 2012 3:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
Lightshow wrote:
I think I agree with the supposition that the cheaper brands were forcing them to cut costs to compete,
After all why buy a lens for $500 when you can get the same thing(same FL & f-stop but with lower IQ) for $300. _________________ A Manual Focus Junky...
One photographers junk lens is an artists favorite tool.
My lens list
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lightshow-photography/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Mos6502
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 Posts: 960 Location: Austin
|
Posted: Sat Oct 27, 2012 3:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
Mos6502 wrote:
There was the Edixa Rex mount... not really a "lens line" since Wirgin didn't make lenses. But it flopped, was dead and gone in under five years. How long did the Exakta Real last? I know they continued for a bit after the (German made) camera line died, so it may have actually been around for more than a couple years.
There are a lot of lenses that were in production for short times, but line revisions is a different thing. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
s58y
Joined: 05 Sep 2010 Posts: 131 Location: Eastern NY
Expire: 2013-09-10
|
Posted: Sat Oct 27, 2012 4:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
s58y wrote:
The Miranda camera normal lens went through some rapid changes between 1955 and 1963:
approximate dates:
- 1955 -- All chrome preset lens
- 1957 -- All chrome, PAD lens (automatic, but with Exakta-like arm)
- 1959 -- All black, PAD lens
- 1960 -- Black and Chrome, PAD lens, more compact
- 1963 -- Automatic lens -- no PAD (internal coupling with camera)
The Topcon cameras also used lenses with Exakta-like arms for a few years, maybe 1960 to 1963 ? _________________
flickr photostream
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Oreste
Joined: 08 Sep 2012 Posts: 451
|
Posted: Sat Oct 27, 2012 4:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Oreste wrote:
Lightshow wrote: |
I think I agree with the supposition that the cheaper brands were forcing them to cut costs to compete,
After all why buy a lens for $500 when you can get the same thing(same FL & f-stop but with lower IQ) for $300. |
Yes, because most photographers don't care that much about the subtler aspects of image quality. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
maxcastle
Joined: 14 Apr 2012 Posts: 492
|
Posted: Sat Oct 27, 2012 4:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
maxcastle wrote:
Oreste wrote: |
Yes, because most photographers don't care that much about the subtler aspects of image quality. |
And this is from the survey you carried out right? _________________ my humble blog is
http://rolotomassi.blog.com/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Oreste
Joined: 08 Sep 2012 Posts: 451
|
Posted: Sat Oct 27, 2012 5:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Oreste wrote:
maxcastle wrote: |
Oreste wrote: |
Yes, because most photographers don't care that much about the subtler aspects of image quality. |
And this is from the survey you carried out right? |
You'll note I did not say 'all', but 'most'. Especially when these subtle improvements cost $$$$$$$. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
maxcastle
Joined: 14 Apr 2012 Posts: 492
|
Posted: Sat Oct 27, 2012 5:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
maxcastle wrote:
Oreste wrote: |
maxcastle wrote: |
Oreste wrote: |
Yes, because most photographers don't care that much about the subtler aspects of image quality. |
And this is from the survey you carried out right? |
You'll note I did not say 'all', but 'most'. Especially when these subtle improvements cost $$$$$$$. |
I did note that you said "most" but even "most" i assume is based on some sort of study/ survey? _________________ my humble blog is
http://rolotomassi.blog.com/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
hifisapi
Joined: 25 Sep 2012 Posts: 941 Location: USA
|
Posted: Sat Oct 27, 2012 7:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
hifisapi wrote:
Oreste wrote: |
Lightshow wrote: |
I think I agree with the supposition that the cheaper brands were forcing them to cut costs to compete,
After all why buy a lens for $500 when you can get the same thing(same FL & f-stop but with lower IQ) for $300. |
Yes, because most photographers don't care that much about the subtler aspects of image quality. |
Or maybe with typical automated processing and 70's film there wasnt as much visible difference as we see now with hi
rez digital sensors. _________________ ===========
ACQUIRED OVER 30 YEARS:
Cameras: DSLR=Pentax istDS FILM=Pentax SP, SP-F, ESII, SP1000, KX, K2
Lenses : Pentax M42 = Super Multi Coated Takumars 50/1.4 55/1.8 100/4-BELLOWS 500/4.5 1000/8 135-600/6.7 Pentax PK= SMC Pentax-Ks K17/4-FF Fisheye K18/3.5 K20/4 K24/3.5 K28/3.5 K28/2 K35/3.5 K35/2 K50/1.2 K50/1.4K 50/4-MACROK 55/1.8 K85/1.8 K100/4-MACRO K100/4-BELLOWS K105/2.8 K120/2.8 K135/3.5 K135/2.5 K150/4 K200/4 K400/5.6 K45-125/4K 85-210/4.5 Pentax PKM = SMC Pentax-M M40/2.8-Pancake M50/1.4 M75-150/4 M80-200/4.5 Pentax PKA= SMC Pentax-A A15/3.5 A50/2.8-MACRO A28/2 A35/2 A50/1.4 A135/2.8 A200/4 A*300/4 A35-105/3.5 A24-50/4 A70-210/4 TAMRON AD2= SP80-200/2.8 SP180/2.5 TOKINA AT-X PK= ATX28-85/3.5-4.5 ATX35-70/2.8 ATX60-120/2.8 ATX80-200/2.8 ATX100-300/4 ATX90/2.5 MACRO KIRON-LESTER DINE PK = 105/2.8-MACRO VIVITAR PK = 135/2.8-MACRO 28-85/4 NOFLEXAR AUTOBELLOWS PK = 60/4 105/4 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
hifisapi
Joined: 25 Sep 2012 Posts: 941 Location: USA
|
Posted: Sat Oct 27, 2012 7:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
hifisapi wrote:
hifisapi wrote: |
Oreste wrote: |
Lightshow wrote: |
I think I agree with the supposition that the cheaper brands were forcing them to cut costs to compete,
After all why buy a lens for $500 when you can get the same thing(same FL & f-stop but with lower IQ) for $300. |
Yes, because most photographers don't care that much about the subtler aspects of image quality. |
Or maybe with typical automated processing and 70's film there wasnt as much visible difference as we see now with hi
rez digital sensors. |
I also meant to mention small 3.5 x 5" prints too _________________ ===========
ACQUIRED OVER 30 YEARS:
Cameras: DSLR=Pentax istDS FILM=Pentax SP, SP-F, ESII, SP1000, KX, K2
Lenses : Pentax M42 = Super Multi Coated Takumars 50/1.4 55/1.8 100/4-BELLOWS 500/4.5 1000/8 135-600/6.7 Pentax PK= SMC Pentax-Ks K17/4-FF Fisheye K18/3.5 K20/4 K24/3.5 K28/3.5 K28/2 K35/3.5 K35/2 K50/1.2 K50/1.4K 50/4-MACROK 55/1.8 K85/1.8 K100/4-MACRO K100/4-BELLOWS K105/2.8 K120/2.8 K135/3.5 K135/2.5 K150/4 K200/4 K400/5.6 K45-125/4K 85-210/4.5 Pentax PKM = SMC Pentax-M M40/2.8-Pancake M50/1.4 M75-150/4 M80-200/4.5 Pentax PKA= SMC Pentax-A A15/3.5 A50/2.8-MACRO A28/2 A35/2 A50/1.4 A135/2.8 A200/4 A*300/4 A35-105/3.5 A24-50/4 A70-210/4 TAMRON AD2= SP80-200/2.8 SP180/2.5 TOKINA AT-X PK= ATX28-85/3.5-4.5 ATX35-70/2.8 ATX60-120/2.8 ATX80-200/2.8 ATX100-300/4 ATX90/2.5 MACRO KIRON-LESTER DINE PK = 105/2.8-MACRO VIVITAR PK = 135/2.8-MACRO 28-85/4 NOFLEXAR AUTOBELLOWS PK = 60/4 105/4 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Oreste
Joined: 08 Sep 2012 Posts: 451
|
Posted: Sat Oct 27, 2012 7:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Oreste wrote:
hifisapi wrote: |
Oreste wrote: |
Lightshow wrote: |
I think I agree with the supposition that the cheaper brands were forcing them to cut costs to compete,
After all why buy a lens for $500 when you can get the same thing(same FL & f-stop but with lower IQ) for $300. |
Yes, because most photographers don't care that much about the subtler aspects of image quality. |
Or maybe with typical automated processing and 70's film there wasnt as much visible difference as we see now with hi
rez digital sensors. |
Right. Most people did not shoot Kodachrome and have Leitz Pradovit projectors. Those who used projectors usually owned Kodak machines, whose lenses (if you can call them that) left everything to be desired. Most people indeed used colour negative film after C-41 films came out, especially when the faster films of ASA400 appeared (first from Fuji, I believe), and when 'cheap' one-hour or overnight processing became commonplace, it got even worse. By about 1985, the quality had dipped rather steeply. I remember when newspapers came stuffed with mailers for processing labs with extremely cheap processing offers. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|