Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] reply from Pop's editor

Subject: [OM] reply from Pop's editor
From: "William Sommerwerck" <williams@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 05:49:33 -0700
I passed my comments on plastic camera to the editor of Popular Photography,
and he was kind enough to send the following:

"We have stated on numerous occasions that high quality plastics are better
than metal in many camera applications., and plastic camera bodies do tend
to bounce and scratch when dropped rather than deform, although they are
more likely to crack. However, my favorite camera-dropping story entails
abuse beyond the capabilities of any plastic camera I know of. Many years
ago, I bought my wife a clean Kodak Signet 35 (original heavy-metal model).
While running down a flight of stone stairs in a park, she managed to snag
the neckstrap on a hand rail. The camera was ripped from her shoulder and
struck the ground with a resounding "thwack" and then, by dint of its
kinetic energy, continued its battering course down the entire stairway. I
expected it to be totalled, but, mirabile dictu, it was in perfect working
order with not even a scratch on it! I suppose I might have found some small
abrasion on its robust cast alloy body if I examined it with a magnifying
glass, but since it only cost me five bucks, I thought that would be unkind.
Try that with your D100--or even your F5!"


> Plastic also allows a tiny body with complex innards. That tiny
> auto-focusing/zoom-lens camera you tuck into your shirt pocket
> would be virtually impossible to manufacture if it were made of
> metal.

"Since molding/casting is common to both plastic and metal I don't really
understand that. In addition to achieve the same strength
plastic must be thicker. What makes modern cameras small is the electronics
which replaces hardware. Mechanically very simple."

The answer is that because plastic is flexible, and can be thin without
deforming easily, it's possible to produce complex plastic shapes that can
easily be removed from the mold. That isn't possible with metal.


"It might be argued that it was not a professional level camera but Canon
did this with what I believe were the N70 and N80 back in the 80s. Virtually
identical except that the expensive "pro" model was metal and the lower
priced model was plastic. I think however that the properties of plastic and
metal are so different that each version would need to be designed
separately."

I should have qualified my statement by saying that I was thinking of
features and appearance. Obviously, the cameras would be somewhat different
internally.


"I think the conversion to plastic would probably be done by imparting some
status to the material as has been done with carbon fiber. Then the cheap
metal body would be the back up. :-)"

Excellent point. But the metal body would still be more expensive. One of
the advantages of plastic (or composite materials) is that they require
little or no finishing.


< 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 >


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • [OM] reply from Pop's editor, William Sommerwerck <=
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz