Winsor Crosby wrote:
> I know you said "viable", and Nikon owners like to claim credit for
> their marque but Pentax invented the SLR six years before in 1953,
> invented the quick return mirror in 1954, the pentaprism viewer(no
> looking down as with a TLR) in 1957, and through the lens metering in
> 1964. All significant I think and Pentax was quite viable until the
> last decade or so. The Nikon F came late to the party in 1959 piggy
> backing on Pentax development. Seems to me that significance should
> go to the product and not the marketing.
>
I'm not so sure about that either. Nor what "viable" means. And my
knowledge of historical dates is almost non-existent.
The Exacta was certainly viable in the sense of taking perfectly good
images. The waist level viewfinder was pretty useless, though.
The Topcon Super-D was a first rate camera that I used a fair amount
back in the early 60s. Features/performance directly competitive with
the F from my then perspective.
Was it the Photomic TTL metering finder that made the difference that
pulled N ahead of the pack? It was certainly a good thingie. I suppose
that may be why my dad replaced the Super-D with an Ftn.
My own first SLR was an Ftn, partly because it was by then the cool, pro
camera and more practically because I could borrow dad's 200/4 and 55 mm
Micro-Nikkor. That lasted until the OM-1..... The 50/2 Nikkor was a
better lens than the early Zuiko 50/1.8, but when the Zuiko 35-70/3.6
came out, it put the Nikkor 43-86 to shame.
Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|