Difference between cast magnesium and brass/chrome panels
 

Remember SLRs of the 1970's? The metal ones had brass panels coated
with chrome. It was usually satin finish. They were hard-wearing, but
eventually if used like tools they'd wear to the brass on exposed
edges, etc. But, people who took care of their cameras could expect a
decade or more of pristine finish. The downside was the panels could
be dented by rough use.
No so with paint on magnesium. It isn't as durable. But, on cameras
like Nikons and Canons, the black paint seems to hold up pretty well.
But this poor Olympus owner has an issue.
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...ssage=41183233

Re: Difference between cast magnesium and brass/chrome panels
 

RichA <rander3127@gmail.com> wrote:

>Remember SLRs of the 1970's? The metal ones had brass panels coated
>with chrome. It was usually satin finish. They were hard-wearing, but
>eventually if used like tools they'd wear to the brass on exposed
>edges, etc. But, people who took care of their cameras could expect a
>decade or more of pristine finish. The downside was the panels could
>be dented by rough use.
>No so with paint on magnesium. It isn't as durable. But, on cameras
>like Nikons and Canons, the black paint seems to hold up pretty well.
>But this poor Olympus owner has an issue.
>http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...ssage=41183233


I'm not surprised he has an issue. I wouldn't be at all happy if the
paint on my new Olympus E-M5 came off and stained my fingers.

But it could be worse. The black paint on the Hasselblad X-Pan (+
Fujifilm equivalent) and the Konica Hexar RF came off in chunks,
exposing the titanium alloy underneath. It got so bad on one of my
Hexar RF bodies that I had all the paint stripped off the top and
bottom plates and clear lacquer applied, then I sold the camera.

You might ask why this is relevant to digital photography in 2012.
Well, the same contractor who made the Hasselblad X-Pan and Konica
Hexar RF (and the Hexar AF, Contax G1/G2 and many Fujifilm medium
format cameras) also makes the Fujifilm X100, X10 and X-Pro1. So
let's see if people start complaining about the paint flaking off
those cameras.

Re: Difference between cast magnesium and brass/chrome panels
 

On Apr 12, 8:56*am, Bruce <docnews2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> RichA <rander3...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >Remember SLRs of the 1970's? *The metal ones had brass panels coated
> >with chrome. *It was usually satin finish. They were hard-wearing, but
> >eventually if used like tools they'd wear to the brass on exposed
> >edges, etc. But, people who took care of their cameras could expect a
> >decade or more of pristine finish. *The downside was the panels could
> >be dented by rough use.
> >No so with paint on magnesium. *It isn't as durable. *But, on cameras
> >like Nikons and Canons, the black paint seems to hold up pretty well.
> >But this poor Olympus owner has an issue.
> >http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...ssage=41183233
>
> I'm not surprised he has an issue. *I wouldn't be at all happy if the
> paint on my new Olympus E-M5 came off and stained my fingers.
>
> But it could be worse. *The black paint on the Hasselblad X-Pan (+
> Fujifilm equivalent) and the Konica Hexar RF came off in chunks,
> exposing the titanium alloy underneath. *It got so bad on one of my
> Hexar RF bodies that I had all the paint stripped off the top and
> bottom plates and clear lacquer applied, then I sold the camera.
>
> You might ask why this is relevant to digital photography in 2012.
> Well, the same contractor who made the Hasselblad X-Pan and Konica
> Hexar RF (and the Hexar AF, Contax G1/G2 and many Fujifilm medium
> format cameras) also makes the Fujifilm X100, X10 and X-Pro1. *So
> let's see if people start complaining about the paint flaking off
> those cameras.

Well, I've seen film cameras with black flat paint flaking off the
insides. Lack of proper cleaning of the metal and poor prep prior to
painting being the likely cause; add age, drying factors, etc. But
for digital, the more stuff goes to places like China and Vietnam for
production, the more problems you will see and the more we have seen.
I don't care if the Japanese foreman is right on scene, it is just not
the same as producing in Japan. Maybe it's because of the "piece
work" production and payment model used in China?
My G1, which I've always loved (and all G1's, 2's and other
Panasonics) have the problem of that rubber/plastic covering wearing
off. There is nothing that can be done with it, so you just live with
it. But I'm glad I ordered my E-5M in silver, at least it won't be as
noticeable. :) Panasonic has stopped using that finish of course in
new cameras. Though the grip on the GH2 felt much less "sure" than on
the G1 because of the lack of the finish and the use of plain
plastic. It was actually sippery, not something you want in a $1000+
or any camera.
Normal, rubberized grips in lots of key areas would be a good idea.

Re: Difference between cast magnesium and brass/chrome panels
 

RichA <rander3127@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Apr 12, 8:56*am, Bruce <docnews2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> RichA <rander3...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >But this poor Olympus owner has an issue.
>> >http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...ssage=41183233
>>
>> I'm not surprised he has an issue. *I wouldn't be at all happy if the
>> paint on my new Olympus E-M5 came off and stained my fingers.
>>
>> But it could be worse. *The black paint on the Hasselblad X-Pan (+
>> Fujifilm equivalent) and the Konica Hexar RF came off in chunks,
>> exposing the titanium alloy underneath. *It got so bad on one of my
>> Hexar RF bodies that I had all the paint stripped off the top and
>> bottom plates and clear lacquer applied, then I sold the camera.
>>
>> You might ask why this is relevant to digital photography in 2012.
>> Well, the same contractor who made the Hasselblad X-Pan and Konica
>> Hexar RF (and the Hexar AF, Contax G1/G2 and many Fujifilm medium
>> format cameras) also makes the Fujifilm X100, X10 and X-Pro1. *So
>> let's see if people start complaining about the paint flaking off
>> those cameras.
>
>Well, I've seen film cameras with black flat paint flaking off the
>insides. Lack of proper cleaning of the metal and poor prep prior to
>painting being the likely cause; add age, drying factors, etc. But
>for digital, the more stuff goes to places like China and Vietnam for
>production, the more problems you will see and the more we have seen.
>I don't care if the Japanese foreman is right on scene, it is just not
>the same as producing in Japan. Maybe it's because of the "piece
>work" production and payment model used in China?


Piece work is alive and well in Japan as is the use of multiple
contractors to provide components and sub-assemblies, all at piece
work rates. Some of these contractors are very small indeed, almost
but not quite down to the level of one-man bands.

What has changed in recent years is a shift to a cheaper location, a
lack of expertise from a less-experienced workforce that time will
probably cure, and - probably most important of all - the loss of the
final assembly and inspection in a Japanese factory owned and overseen
by the camera maker.

The Japanese have a culture of perfection that is not shared elsewhere
to quite the same extent. However, that doesn't rule out the
possibility of improvement. Indeed, Japanese manufacturing was quite
primitive in the 1950s and attracted much of the criticism that is
being levelled at Chinese manufacturing now. But the Japanese
learned, and improved.

Who is to say that the Chinese won't catch up when the Japanese
clearly have?

Re: Difference between cast magnesium and brass/chrome panels
 

RichA wrote:
> Remember SLRs of the 1970's? The metal ones had brass panels coated
> with chrome. It was usually satin finish. They were hard-wearing, but
> eventually if used like tools they'd wear to the brass on exposed
> edges, etc. But, people who took care of their cameras could expect a
> decade or more of pristine finish. The downside was the panels could
> be dented by rough use.
> No so with paint on magnesium. It isn't as durable. But, on cameras
> like Nikons and Canons, the black paint seems to hold up pretty well.
> But this poor Olympus owner has an issue.
> http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...ssage=41183233
>

Hi,

My Olympus OM-4T bodies have titanium panels, and are strong, reasonably
attractive, and durable,with no paint to peel off. It is too bad that
titanium panels are not used on current digital cameras, to my knowledge.

Mort Linder

Re: Difference between cast magnesium and brass/chrome panels
 

On Apr 12, 11:03*am, Bruce <docnews2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> RichA <rander3...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Apr 12, 8:56*am, Bruce <docnews2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> RichA <rander3...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >But this poor Olympus owner has an issue.
> >> >http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...ssage=41183233
>
> >> I'm not surprised he has an issue. *I wouldn't be at all happy if the
> >> paint on my new Olympus E-M5 came off and stained my fingers.
>
> >> But it could be worse. *The black paint on the Hasselblad X-Pan (+
> >> Fujifilm equivalent) and the Konica Hexar RF came off in chunks,
> >> exposing the titanium alloy underneath. *It got so bad on one of my
> >> Hexar RF bodies that I had all the paint stripped off the top and
> >> bottom plates and clear lacquer applied, then I sold the camera.
>
> >> You might ask why this is relevant to digital photography in 2012.
> >> Well, the same contractor who made the Hasselblad X-Pan and Konica
> >> Hexar RF (and the Hexar AF, Contax G1/G2 and many Fujifilm medium
> >> format cameras) also makes the Fujifilm X100, X10 and X-Pro1. *So
> >> let's see if people start complaining about the paint flaking off
> >> those cameras.
>
> >Well, I've seen film cameras with black flat paint flaking off *the
> >insides. *Lack of proper cleaning of the metal and poor prep prior to
> >painting being the likely cause; add age, drying factors, etc. *But
> >for digital, the more stuff goes to places like China and Vietnam for
> >production, the more problems you will see and the more we have seen.
> >I don't care if the Japanese foreman is right on scene, it is just not
> >the same as producing in Japan. *Maybe it's because of the "piece
> >work" production and payment model used in China?
>
> Piece work is alive and well in Japan as is the use of multiple
> contractors to provide components and sub-assemblies, all at piece
> work rates. *Some of these contractors are very small indeed, almost
> but not quite down to the level of one-man bands.
>
> What has changed in recent years is a shift to a cheaper location, a
> lack of expertise from a less-experienced workforce that time will
> probably cure, and - probably most important of all - the loss of the
> final assembly and inspection in a Japanese factory owned and overseen
> by the camera maker.
>
> The Japanese have a culture of perfection that is not shared elsewhere
> to quite the same extent. *However, that doesn't rule out the
> possibility of improvement. *Indeed, Japanese manufacturing was quite
> primitive in the 1950s and attracted much of the criticism that is
> being levelled at Chinese manufacturing now. *But the Japanese
> learned, and improved.
>
> Who is to say that the Chinese won't catch up when the Japanese
> clearly have?

They may. It just doesn't do us much good right now.
The Japanese culture of perfection was however mandated by law. As
per a law passed in the 1960's, they were not allowed to export junk
to European or N. American markets, but they could sell junk in their
home market.

Re: Difference between cast magnesium and brass/chrome panels
 

RichA <rander3127@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Apr 12, 11:03*am, Bruce <docnews2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> RichA <rander3...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >On Apr 12, 8:56*am, Bruce <docnews2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> RichA <rander3...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >But this poor Olympus owner has an issue.
>> >> >http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...ssage=41183233
>>
>> >> I'm not surprised he has an issue. *I wouldn't be at all happy if the
>> >> paint on my new Olympus E-M5 came off and stained my fingers.
>>
>> >> But it could be worse. *The black paint on the Hasselblad X-Pan (+
>> >> Fujifilm equivalent) and the Konica Hexar RF came off in chunks,
>> >> exposing the titanium alloy underneath. *It got so bad on one of my
>> >> Hexar RF bodies that I had all the paint stripped off the top and
>> >> bottom plates and clear lacquer applied, then I sold the camera.
>>
>> >> You might ask why this is relevant to digital photography in 2012.
>> >> Well, the same contractor who made the Hasselblad X-Pan and Konica
>> >> Hexar RF (and the Hexar AF, Contax G1/G2 and many Fujifilm medium
>> >> format cameras) also makes the Fujifilm X100, X10 and X-Pro1. *So
>> >> let's see if people start complaining about the paint flaking off
>> >> those cameras.
>>
>> >Well, I've seen film cameras with black flat paint flaking off *the
>> >insides. *Lack of proper cleaning of the metal and poor prep prior to
>> >painting being the likely cause; add age, drying factors, etc. *But
>> >for digital, the more stuff goes to places like China and Vietnam for
>> >production, the more problems you will see and the more we have seen.
>> >I don't care if the Japanese foreman is right on scene, it is just not
>> >the same as producing in Japan. *Maybe it's because of the "piece
>> >work" production and payment model used in China?
>>
>> Piece work is alive and well in Japan as is the use of multiple
>> contractors to provide components and sub-assemblies, all at piece
>> work rates. *Some of these contractors are very small indeed, almost
>> but not quite down to the level of one-man bands.
>>
>> What has changed in recent years is a shift to a cheaper location, a
>> lack of expertise from a less-experienced workforce that time will
>> probably cure, and - probably most important of all - the loss of the
>> final assembly and inspection in a Japanese factory owned and overseen
>> by the camera maker.
>>
>> The Japanese have a culture of perfection that is not shared elsewhere
>> to quite the same extent. *However, that doesn't rule out the
>> possibility of improvement. *Indeed, Japanese manufacturing was quite
>> primitive in the 1950s and attracted much of the criticism that is
>> being levelled at Chinese manufacturing now. *But the Japanese
>> learned, and improved.
>>
>> Who is to say that the Chinese won't catch up when the Japanese
>> clearly have?
>
>They may. It just doesn't do us much good right now.


True. But things aren't quite as bad as they are painted. ;-)


>The Japanese culture of perfection was however mandated by law. As
>per a law passed in the 1960's, they were not allowed to export junk
>to European or N. American markets, but they could sell junk in their
>home market.


I didn't know that. It would explain a lot.

Re: Difference between cast magnesium and brass/chrome panels
 

On Apr 12, 11:52*am, Mort <m...@cloud9.net> wrote:
> RichA wrote:
> > Remember SLRs of the 1970's? *The metal ones had brass panels coated
> > with chrome. *It was usually satin finish. They were hard-wearing, but
> > eventually if used like tools they'd wear to the brass on exposed
> > edges, etc. But, people who took care of their cameras could expect a
> > decade or more of pristine finish. *The downside was the panels could
> > be dented by rough use.
> > No so with paint on magnesium. *It isn't as durable. *But, on cameras
> > like Nikons and Canons, the black paint seems to hold up pretty well.
> > But this poor Olympus owner has an issue.
> >http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...ssage=41183233
>
> Hi,
>
> My Olympus OM-4T bodies have titanium panels, and are strong, reasonably
> attractive, and durable,with no paint to peel off. It is too bad that
> titanium panels are not used on current digital cameras, to my knowledge.
>
> Mort Linder

I had an OM-4T, unfortunately, the outer finish was heavily worn (I
got it and a 55mm f1.2 lens for $200 so it's understandable the
condition was as it was) and the goldish colour titanium shows
through. But it still worked.

http://www.pbase.com/andersonrm/image/97688614

Re: Difference between cast magnesium and brass/chrome panels
 

On Apr 12, 3:22*pm, Bruce <docnews2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> RichA <rander3...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Apr 12, 11:03*am, Bruce <docnews2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> RichA <rander3...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >On Apr 12, 8:56*am, Bruce <docnews2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> RichA <rander3...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> >But this poor Olympus owner has an issue.
> >> >> >http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...ssage=41183233
>
> >> >> I'm not surprised he has an issue. *I wouldn't be at all happy ifthe
> >> >> paint on my new Olympus E-M5 came off and stained my fingers.
>
> >> >> But it could be worse. *The black paint on the Hasselblad X-Pan (+
> >> >> Fujifilm equivalent) and the Konica Hexar RF came off in chunks,
> >> >> exposing the titanium alloy underneath. *It got so bad on one of my
> >> >> Hexar RF bodies that I had all the paint stripped off the top and
> >> >> bottom plates and clear lacquer applied, then I sold the camera.
>
> >> >> You might ask why this is relevant to digital photography in 2012.
> >> >> Well, the same contractor who made the Hasselblad X-Pan and Konica
> >> >> Hexar RF (and the Hexar AF, Contax G1/G2 and many Fujifilm medium
> >> >> format cameras) also makes the Fujifilm X100, X10 and X-Pro1. *So
> >> >> let's see if people start complaining about the paint flaking off
> >> >> those cameras.
>
> >> >Well, I've seen film cameras with black flat paint flaking off *the
> >> >insides. *Lack of proper cleaning of the metal and poor prep prior to
> >> >painting being the likely cause; add age, drying factors, etc. *But
> >> >for digital, the more stuff goes to places like China and Vietnam for
> >> >production, the more problems you will see and the more we have seen.
> >> >I don't care if the Japanese foreman is right on scene, it is just not
> >> >the same as producing in Japan. *Maybe it's because of the "piece
> >> >work" production and payment model used in China?
>
> >> Piece work is alive and well in Japan as is the use of multiple
> >> contractors to provide components and sub-assemblies, all at piece
> >> work rates. *Some of these contractors are very small indeed, almost
> >> but not quite down to the level of one-man bands.
>
> >> What has changed in recent years is a shift to a cheaper location, a
> >> lack of expertise from a less-experienced workforce that time will
> >> probably cure, and - probably most important of all - the loss of the
> >> final assembly and inspection in a Japanese factory owned and overseen
> >> by the camera maker.
>
> >> The Japanese have a culture of perfection that is not shared elsewhere
> >> to quite the same extent. *However, that doesn't rule out the
> >> possibility of improvement. *Indeed, Japanese manufacturing was quite
> >> primitive in the 1950s and attracted much of the criticism that is
> >> being levelled at Chinese manufacturing now. *But the Japanese
> >> learned, and improved.
>
> >> Who is to say that the Chinese won't catch up when the Japanese
> >> clearly have?
>
> >They may. *It just doesn't do us much good right now.
>
> True. *But things aren't quite as bad as they are painted. *;-)
>
> >The Japanese culture of perfection was however mandated by law. *As
> >per a law passed in the 1960's, they were not allowed to export junk
> >to European or N. American markets, but they could sell junk in *their
> >home market.
>
> I didn't know that. *It would explain a lot.

I'm glad I ordered silver. If the paint wears, the colour of the
metal will be similar. :)

Re: Difference between cast magnesium and brass/chrome panels
 

RichA wrote:
> On Apr 12, 11:52 am, Mort<m...@cloud9.net> wrote:
>> RichA wrote:
>>> Remember SLRs of the 1970's? The metal ones had brass panels coated
>>> with chrome. It was usually satin finish. They were hard-wearing, but
>>> eventually if used like tools they'd wear to the brass on exposed
>>> edges, etc. But, people who took care of their cameras could expect a
>>> decade or more of pristine finish. The downside was the panels could
>>> be dented by rough use.
>>> No so with paint on magnesium. It isn't as durable. But, on cameras
>>> like Nikons and Canons, the black paint seems to hold up pretty well.
>>> But this poor Olympus owner has an issue.
>>> http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...ssage=41183233
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> My Olympus OM-4T bodies have titanium panels, and are strong, reasonably
>> attractive, and durable,with no paint to peel off. It is too bad that
>> titanium panels are not used on current digital cameras, to my knowledge.
>>
>> Mort Linder
>
> I had an OM-4T, unfortunately, the outer finish was heavily worn (I
> got it and a 55mm f1.2 lens for $200 so it's understandable the
> condition was as it was) and the goldish colour titanium shows
> through. But it still worked.
>
> http://www.pbase.com/andersonrm/image/97688614

Is titanium metal gold colored? I thought that it was a rather
silvery-metallic color. Are you sure that it was an OM-4T, and not an
OM-4, where wear would show brass?

Regards,

Mort Linder