Difference between cast magnesium and brass/chrome panels

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by RichA, Apr 12, 2012.

  1. RichA

    RichA Guest

    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/read.asp?forum=1041&message=41183233
    RichA, Apr 12, 2012
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. RichA

    Bruce Guest

    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/read.asp?forum=1041&message=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.
    Bruce, Apr 12, 2012
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. RichA

    RichA Guest

    On Apr 12, 8:56 am, Bruce <> 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/read.asp?forum=1041&message=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.
    RichA, Apr 12, 2012
    #3
  4. RichA

    Bruce Guest

    RichA <> wrote:
    >On Apr 12, 8:56 am, Bruce <> wrote:
    >> RichA <> wrote:
    >> >But this poor Olympus owner has an issue.
    >> >http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1041&message=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?
    Bruce, Apr 12, 2012
    #4
  5. RichA

    Mort Guest

    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/read.asp?forum=1041&message=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
    Mort, Apr 12, 2012
    #5
  6. RichA

    RichA Guest

    On Apr 12, 11:03 am, Bruce <> wrote:
    > RichA <> wrote:
    > >On Apr 12, 8:56 am, Bruce <> wrote:
    > >> RichA <> wrote:
    > >> >But this poor Olympus owner has an issue.
    > >> >http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1041&message=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.
    RichA, Apr 12, 2012
    #6
  7. RichA

    Bruce Guest

    RichA <> wrote:

    >On Apr 12, 11:03 am, Bruce <> wrote:
    >> RichA <> wrote:
    >> >On Apr 12, 8:56 am, Bruce <> wrote:
    >> >> RichA <> wrote:
    >> >> >But this poor Olympus owner has an issue.
    >> >> >http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1041&message=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.
    Bruce, Apr 12, 2012
    #7
  8. RichA

    RichA Guest

    On Apr 12, 11:52 am, Mort <> 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/read.asp?forum=1041&message=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
    RichA, Apr 12, 2012
    #8
  9. RichA

    RichA Guest

    On Apr 12, 3:22 pm, Bruce <> wrote:
    > RichA <> wrote:
    > >On Apr 12, 11:03 am, Bruce <> wrote:
    > >> RichA <> wrote:
    > >> >On Apr 12, 8:56 am, Bruce <> wrote:
    > >> >> RichA <> wrote:
    > >> >> >But this poor Olympus owner has an issue.
    > >> >> >http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1041&message=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. :)
    RichA, Apr 12, 2012
    #9
  10. RichA

    Mort Guest

    RichA wrote:
    > On Apr 12, 11:52 am, Mort<> 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/read.asp?forum=1041&message=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
    Mort, Apr 13, 2012
    #10
  11. RichA

    RichA Guest

    On Apr 12, 10:01 pm, Mort <> wrote:
    > RichA wrote:
    > > On Apr 12, 11:52 am, Mort<>  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/read.asp?forum=1041&message=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


    Yes, note the T in the image.
    RichA, Apr 13, 2012
    #11
  12. RichA

    Bruce Guest

    RichA <> wrote:
    >On Apr 12, 10:01 pm, Mort <> wrote:
    >> RichA wrote:
    >> > 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?

    >
    >Yes, note the T in the image.



    Titanium isn't gold coloured, it is a dull silver with a strong
    brownish tinge.

    That camera looks in poor cosmetic shape but its picture-taking
    ability should be as good as new. The OM4-T was even more bulletproof
    than the titanium Nikon SLRs.

    The lens is interesting. It was marketed by C. Z. Scientific
    Instruments Limited, a UK company that imported and distributed East
    German Praktica, Pentacon and Carl Zeiss (Jena) products in western
    markets.

    By the late 1970s, sales of the increasingly out of date East German
    products were in sharp decline, and C. Z. Scientific Instruments
    Limited took on the agency for Sigma lenses. It didn't take them long
    to realise that buying cheap Sigma lenses rebranded as "Carl Zeiss
    Jena", whose trademark they were licensed to use in many western
    markets, would make them vastly more money (and more easily) than
    trying to sell outdated East German glass.

    Their desire for maximum profit also meant that the lenses Sigma
    supplied were not their latest or best designs. Basically, they were
    the sort of cheap junk that Sigma became renowned for. Similar cheap
    Sigma designs were sold in north America under the Quantaray brand.

    So your "Carl Zeiss Jena" 24mm f/2.8 is just a cheap re-badged Sigma,
    made in Japan. It isn't all bad news, though, because the Sigma 24mm
    was quite a good lens, offering good sharpness at the expense of quite
    a lot of barrel distortion.
    Bruce, Apr 13, 2012
    #12
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. magg

    magnesium news

    magg, Aug 30, 2006, in forum: The Lounge
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,873
  2. ABC
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    391
    Drifter
    Dec 5, 2004
  3. ABC
    Replies:
    33
    Views:
    1,154
    David J Taylor
    Dec 26, 2004
  4. Mark²

    New Magnesium Alloy BG4 Grip too

    Mark², Aug 22, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    558
    Confused
    Aug 23, 2005
  5. Max Burke
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    554
    Gordon
    Jul 11, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page