Oddly enough, I suspect they didn't know what a mess it was going to
cause years later when they did or didn't put it in. It wasn't 'bad'
then; might even have been thought to be 'good', else why increase
production costs for labor and materials to install it?
The variations more likely have to do with the normal changes, intended
or not, that happen in many years long production runs. Maybe somebody
screwed up. Weren't these made in several factories in their heyday?
Maybe somebody in one used the foam for something else, or sold it to
pay his misteress's rent, or just ran out and needed to keep the line
running, and just left it out of a run. Who knows?
Moose
Alan wrote:
Er -- I'm so confused. If foam is bad -- why did the early camera not have it
but the newer ones do ?
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|