Why we will never see anymore legendary lenses from Nikon!

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by Paul Furman, Mar 17, 2007.

  1. The real reason you don't see legendary lenses are because legends are
    never legends in their own time. In addition designing and making lenses
    like the ones Nikon and a few others were well known for are much easier to
    make today with more glass options and computers to design them. A lens
    that would have attracted a lot of attention 30 years ago, will get a Oh Hum
    today.
     
    Joseph Meehan, Mar 18, 2007
    #41
    1. Advertisements

  2. It is in the factory that the problem exist, especially worker exposure.
    That and given that there are other alternatives that can produce an equally
    good product there is little reason to use the old stuff.
     
    Joseph Meehan, Mar 18, 2007
    #42
    1. Advertisements

  3. Paul Furman

    THO Guest

    I was commenting on the toxicity of uranium, a naturally-occurring
    substance, not making a commentary on the bomb dropping.
     
    THO, Mar 18, 2007
    #43
  4. Paul Furman

    THO Guest

    Actually, the switch to lead-free solder started in the late 70s in the
    US. The concern was more about the leaching of lead into drinking water
    within homes and institutional water pipes, particularly during the
    night when the water wasn't changing in the pipes. There are theories
    that lead exposure from drinking water could be more problematic than
    lead paint exposure.
     
    THO, Mar 18, 2007
    #44
  5. Toss em in a wood chipper?
     
    David Orriss Jr, Mar 18, 2007
    #45
  6. Ugh... don't get me started... I have eat a LOT of fiber to use those
    damn things... O_O
     
    David Orriss Jr, Mar 18, 2007
    #46
  7. Paul Furman

    J. Clarke Guest

    What are these "other alternatives"?
     
    J. Clarke, Mar 18, 2007
    #47
  8. You're forgetting about all those inner-city kids being poisoned by the lead
    paint on the windowsills they use for teething rings.







    Rita
     
    Rita Ä Berkowitz, Mar 18, 2007
    #48
  9. This is great news! Does this mean we will be seeing some decent prime
    lenses being offered? Surely, if what you say were the case they no longer
    have to worry about high manufacturing costs.






    Rita
     
    Rita Ä Berkowitz, Mar 18, 2007
    #49
  10. A nice homemade bowl of beef or chicken soup loaded with barley will have
    you exploding like a Sunni Muslim.





    Rita
     
    Rita Ä Berkowitz, Mar 18, 2007
    #50
  11. Paul Furman

    Paul Furman Guest

    According to that article just a handful of commercial applications. Is
    there a 35mm lens you are aware of which requires lead or arsenic and
    cannot be made with different formulations? Not according to that
    article. Rita was just spouting nonsense, those lenses she refers to
    were discontinued because of the labor costs of shaping the lenses. In
    fact there are ways around that too now. The 58 noct was just an oddball
    with little demand, the 28/1.4 should be brought back though. As a DX
    lens if nothing else.
     
    Paul Furman, Mar 19, 2007
    #51
  12. Paul Furman

    Skip Guest

    Why, thank you!
     
    Skip, Mar 19, 2007
    #52

  13. PMSL!!!!!!
     
    David Orriss Jr, Mar 19, 2007
    #53
  14. Paul Furman

    Skip Guest


    The environmentalist plague is costing jobs, products and will soon
    drive up the price of food
    (thanks to the shift of corn from food to ethanol production) by about
    2x or more.

    20%, Rich, not 100%. And Bushie's Agribusiness buddies are more responsible
    for that than any environmentalists.
     
    Skip, Mar 19, 2007
    #54
  15. Paul Furman

    Paul Furman Guest

    Creating better jobs.
    You're in the wrong business if you're losing jobs.
     
    Paul Furman, Mar 19, 2007
    #55
  16. Paul Furman

    RichA Guest

     
    RichA, Mar 19, 2007
    #56
  17. You really are without a clue, you know that?
     
    David Orriss Jr, Mar 19, 2007
    #57
  18. And waste more time with your drivel? No thanks.
     
    David Orriss Jr, Mar 19, 2007
    #58
  19. Yea and that Dihydrous Oxide stuff. Hell, we all know how bad that
    stuff is.. it's used in styrofoam production...!
     
    David Orriss Jr, Mar 19, 2007
    #59
  20. Paul Furman

    THO Guest

    Reread the whole message you fool.
     
    THO, Mar 19, 2007
    #60
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.