A Component of Build-Quality: Efficient Engineering vs Over-Engineering

jp498 said:

Sort of the cosmonaut pencil versus astronaut pressurized ballpoint pen has been beaten in pretty good so far.

Another cause is patents. Again, you'd have to ask the designers for sure. Many things are made complicated to avoid patent infringement. In todays world, that's the appeal of free open source software. You make new things using simple software tools whose patents have expired.

Click to expand...

this is a HUGE reason for needless complexity in shutters. I think it is why Contax shutters went with those silly brass roller blinds rather than a simple cloth shutter. Avoiding patent infringement was a big problem -- except when you completely ignored it, like the Russkies and Japanese did after WWII.

The Leica vs Contax Canon vs Pentax
The Contax shutter was in no way inferior to the Leica shutter in some instances it was superior. The Contax shutter speed dial did not turn when you pushed the shutter, the shutter was less prone to burning in holes, the shutter allowed higher flash sync speed, the shutter was just as quiet if not quieter than the Leica. The design also made fading impossible. The Problem is that we compare cameras that were made 70 to 80 years ago and haven't always aged that well. At the time they were made nobody complained about the quality of a Contax II, they were considered the ultimate 35mm pro cams and the Leica a close second behind the Contax. The reason for Contax to design their own shutter was patents in all likelihood but compared to Zeiss Ikon Leitz was a dwarf and Contax could afford to design their own shutter.

As for my assumption that shutter adjustment complexity can mean more precision it's an assumption nothing more but I've also never heard that Canons are less reliable than Pentax

summicron1 said:

this is a HUGE reason for needless complexity in shutters. I think it is why Contax shutters went with those silly brass roller blinds rather than a simple cloth shutter. Avoiding patent infringement was a big problem -- except when you completely ignored it, like the Russkies and Japanese did after WWII.

Click to expand...

This is completely untrue. German patents were placed in the public domain as part of war reparations, so there was nothing to ignore. The Soviets (not the "Russkies") got the designs of Contax, the Super Ikontas, their respective lenses, and other German tech. as war reparations. Those "silly brass roller blinds" were a solid order of magnitude more advanced than the Leitz cloth shutter, which was already a well known type when Leitz adapted it to their cameras.

One thing I've not seen mentioned is marketing forces. Engineers are told "come up with something different/unique" as a selling point, and they do whether it's good engineering or not. An example is the Cadillac 8/6/4 engine, an abomination mechanics still remember with cold sweats.

Tom1956 said:

I never cared much for any Canon. Pentax is in another league entirely. To me, Canon was in the same class as Ricoh, Minolta, Konica, Miranda, Yashica, and the rest of the second-tier brands. They have their fans, but I'm not one of them. Either you have a Nikon brand, or a Pentax. The rest is just unremarkable.

Click to expand...

Alpa.

I've been doing product development for an silly long time and I can tell you it easy to do something with more parts. It takes a good engineer a bit of time to do it with fewer parts. The Canon is under engineered.

It's significant to this discussion that the O.P. who is someone with no engineering experience, training or qualifications can make pronouncements that the products of some of the Worlds best camera Designers, technicians, electronics engineers and materials scientists who devise the cameras produced by the leading camera manufacturers are "over engineered" because he can't repair them himself on his kitchen table, when they were never devised for this.

Were japanese engineers using robots to install that many screws. May be they did because they can.

I might not have exact facts straight--but didn't Steve Jobs walk away with a bunch of money selling video games to Atari, where he was paid so much per chip eliminated from the circuit, and Steve Wozniac pulled off the feat? Something like that.

"Making a bunch of money" Isn't the criteria of engineering excellence.

benjiboy said:

"Making a bunch of money" Isn't the criteria of engineering excellence.

Click to expand...

That wasn't my point. Jobs told a tale to his friend Woz about how much money he had made, and Woz didn't get his cut.

Tom1956 said:

That wasn't my point. Jobs told a tale to his friend Woz about how much money he had made, and Woz didn't get his cut.

Click to expand...

My mistake, I thought we were discussing engineering, not intellectual rights.

Technology and fashion overtook craftsmanship. The electronic shutter mechanism in a consumer SLR performs better than the blinds of a Contax rangefinder. People don't need cameras that can stop bullets or require microsurgery to repair.

blockend said:

Technology and fashion overtook craftsmanship. The electronic shutter mechanism in a consumer SLR performs better than the blinds of a Contax rangefinder. People don't need cameras that can stop bullets or require microsurgery to repair.

Click to expand...

Very true, the technology moves on at such a rapid pace these.days that what was cutting edge a few years ago is a joke today, and in.the age of planned obsolescence consumer goods are not made to.last.