I'm still reluctant to accept plastic as a bearing surface as in
focusing helicoids. However, it's probably used that way in my two
Tamrons... but not in the two Tokina AT-X Pros.
Chuck Norcutt
C.H.Ling wrote:
> If plastic part is just using on the camera frame that is ok to me, covering
> the plastic with a thin metal is more than acceptable, I prefer this more
> than just a plastic case like the XA. What bother me is not the plastic it
> is the high price :-)
>
> I have no problem with plastic body as long as all critical moving parts are
> using the right materials (there are many different types of plastic and in
> some area metal may do better). My DZ 11-22 could have problem in design (or
> manufacturing), the front element group had a play of around 0.5mm after
> three years of light use, this made infinity focus impossible at 18mm in the
> worse case, don't know if this is related to a worn out of plastic part.
>
> I don't have much confidence on Olympus after experiencing so many problems
> myself.
>
> BTW, I just have a look on my 50-250, the major part of the body is metal,
> only the aperture setting ring is plastic.
>
> C.H.Ling
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "iwert bernakiewicz"
>
>> This will be an ongoing discussion. I love metal bodied instruments,
>> but plastic is a too generalized word, just like metal. The 3Ti has a
>> titanium shell, but also many plastic parts inside.
>> The plastics of today are amazing. I trust the product designers,
>> Olympus has a very good record with plastics,
>> the 50-250 was plastic, the late 50mm f1.8 is plastic, the 35-70
>> f3.5-4.5 was plastic, the OM-10, 20 etc cover was plastic, the mju's,
>> the AF-1,
>> etcetera.
>> I also think it is irrational to mount a 300mm or 50-200 to any body
>> with handling by just the body alone.
>>
>> Plastic is fantastic :) Meta
>>
>> Iwert
>>
>> 2009/6/23 Dawid Loubser <dawidl@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
>>> There is a raging debate on DPReview about the E-P1 and the lenses
>>> being constructed entirely of plastic. See the pictorial disassmebly
>>> of the E-P1 here:
>>>
>>> http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1000&message=32207680
>>>
>>> What is your take on this? I don't have particularly strong feelings
>>> about this -
>>> all the cameras I currently use are entirely made of metal, and of
>>> course feel
>>> very nice, but what bothers me is the sad attempt at hiding it by
>>> putting a thin
>>> layer of metal on an otherwise entire made-of-plastic lens and camera.
>>>
>>> This, to me, is like the new MINI Cooper S, which has an "air intake"
>>> on the bonnet, but
>>> this air intake is completely blocked off (and probably actually
>>> decreases aerodynamic
>>> efficiency" all because the previous model, which had a supercharger,
>>> needed this cooling intake.
>>> I can't stand fakery like this, it always exists to hide a less-than-
>>> innovative product.
>>>
>>> Is this not the same? Instead of innovating, is Olympus not just
>>> paying homage to
>>> the previous model with this thin veneer, instead of really innovating
>>> and building
>>> a special product?
>>>
>>> As I said, I have no strong feelings, but what do you guys feel?
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|