Ever wonder why? (Japanese vs Germans)

[chip j]

Why did the physically smaller Japanese come up w/such big, heavy Pro equipment (Nikon, Mamiya), while the bigger Germans came up w/smaller, lighter equipment (Leica, Rollei)?? (And there's no racism in my question)

 

[Steve Smith]

Pentax MX is Japanese, as is the Nikon FG. They are quite small by SLR standards - especially when compared with the German Leica R series of SLRs.


Steve.

 

[blockend]

The Germans also came up with the Leica M5. The fact is by the late 1960s most people thought the 35mm miniature format should have a film carrier the size of a house brick. Those who didn't paid extra for the privilege, or had to navigate the world of rangefinder, point and shoot cameras or half frame. Olympus changed all that with the OM1 but most people still weren't listening, and didn't until the end of film cameras.

 

[Arctic amateur]

My Practica TL 1000 is my biggest and heaviest non-motorized SLR, much heavier than my Nikon FE and Pentax P30. Then again, it's also older, so perhaps not a fair comparison.

 

[cuthbert]

Pentax MX is Japanese, as is the Nikon FG. They are quite small by SLR standards - especially when compared with the German Leica R series of SLRs.


Steve.

The MX is smaller than a Leica M3/4, I have all of them. Olympus is also pretty small...the Germans used to make big SLRs while the Japs started the miniaturisation of the SLRs in the 70s with the big O.

Mamiya used to make pretty small SLRs as far as I remember but you can't make a small medium format SLR.

The Germans also came up with the Leica M5. The fact is by the late 1960s most people thought the 35mm miniature format should have a film carrier the size of a house brick. Those who didn't paid extra for the privilege, or had to navigate the world of rangefinder, point and shoot cameras or half frame. Olympus changed all that with the OM1 but most people still weren't listening, and didn't until the end of film cameras.

The M5 is actually my favourite Leica and it's big because it has a very good TTL spotmeter installed on a retractable arm that floats in the middle of the lens, actually it was the last serious attempt to make a professional rangefinder capable of competiting against the pro SLRs like the Nikon F and Canon F1, the technology of the late 60s didn't allow to have a smaller camera with these features.

Regarding the small SLRs, the only people who didn't listen were Canonikon, or better their "pro" customers, according to them bigger was always better and Nikon finished the film era with a ugly monster like the F5, but from the late 70s ALL the other japanese manufacturers started to make smaller SLRs because the everyday Joe wanted a tiny camera, in this optic he was wiser than many "pros".

 

[darkosaric]

I think it is very simple: manual focus rangefinder lenses are smaller than SLR autofocus lenses. Bodies as well. Minox, Leica, Rollei - none are SLR.
It just happened that Germans started with rangefinders, and SLR came later strong in Japan.

 

[Ricardo Miranda]

(...) especially when compared with the German Leica R series of SLRs.


Steve.

Even the Leica R made with the Japanese Minolta internals.

Some of the smallest 35mm SLRs are the Canon EOS 300, The Minolta Dynax 5 (and the 3 and 4 models) and the Nikon F55/75 models.

 

[Sewin]

I think it is very simple: manual focus rangefinder lenses are smaller than SLR autofocus lenses. Bodies as well. Minox, Leica, Rollei - none are SLR.
It just happened that Germans started with rangefinders, and SLR came later strong in Japan.

Exactly, you hit the nail right on the head.

 

[miha]

Most of the Leica R cameras are particularly small.

 

[Dan Fromm]

Why did the physically smaller Japanese come up w/such big, heavy Pro equipment (Nikon, Mamiya), while the bigger Germans came up w/smaller, lighter equipment (Leica, Rollei)?? (And there's no racism in my question)

Contarex, anyone?

 

[Steve Smith]

Most of the Leica R cameras are particularly small.

I have never actually seen one in real life. They have always appeared large in pictures.


Steve.

 

[Ricardo Miranda]

Steve is about right:
the earlier Leicaflex are on the large and heavy side.
Later R3 onwards are based on Minolta designs.
That tells you a lot about the respect Leica had for the Japanese Minolta, or they just couldn't find a better partner.

 

[Brett Rogers]

Contarex, anyone?

^^ This...

 

[gone]

I sorta don't get the analogy. The Olympus OM cameras, my Nikon FG and EM, the Pentax ME, these are some of the smallest cameras you can find if we're talking SLRs. The Japanese MF folders, which were nearly always spinoff of German designs, were small, and the same could be said of the Japanese TLRs. Only the Japanese MF cameras are big, but that's the nature of a MF, SLR. The Leica CL was a collaboration between the Germans and the Japanese, and it and the CLE were the smallest 35mm rangefinders made to my recollection, unless you want to count the screwmount cameras. Again, most of the Japanese screwmount cameras were basically copies of German cameras, and they were the same size, except for the later Canon rangefinders, and later the Nikon rangefinder cameras were spinoffs of the German Contax designs.

The German made Leicaflex cameras were huge and heavy. Wonderfully made, but huge. Other than the Leica R3, all the R series cameras were small (I owned them and they were quite compact). Both were spinoffs of Minolta cameras. It was when the Germans started making their own R cameras that they got huge again, starting w/ the R6 to the R7. Then they went nuts and went back to huge, starting w/ the R8, which is basically MF size.

 

[Rick A]

I don't think it's a mind set as much as it has to do with early manufacturing methods and engineering. Early camera bodies were milled from a solid block of metal, later some were investment cast, either way they had to be machined by people actually standing at their machines and operating them, way before CNC was available. As methods of manufacture improved, engineering and design started to take advantage of newer methods. Then as more features were designed into the cameras, they started to grow in size to house the computers and servos needed to operate.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Why did the physically smaller Japanese come up w/such big, heavy Pro equipment (Nikon, Mamiya), while the bigger Germans came up w/smaller, lighter equipment (Leica, Rollei)?? (And there's no racism in my question)

because they respect each otherprofessionally

 

[GarageBoy]

Contarex is a huge hulking beast of over engineering
Rolleiflex 600x and SL66 are large compared to Hasselblad
Leica is small because it's literally a shell over a small chassis- compare to the mirror box and heavy internals of an F/F2

 

[Colin Corneau]

...

Regarding the small SLRs, the only people who didn't listen were Canonikon, or better their "pro" customers, according to them bigger was always better and Nikon finished the film era with a ugly monster like the F5, but from the late 70s ALL the other japanese manufacturers started to make smaller SLRs because the everyday Joe wanted a tiny camera, in this optic he was wiser than many "pros".

Hoo boy...

Nikon's still making the F6, so I'd say they didn't finish anything with the F5, except perhaps a lot of the competition. As one of those 'dumb' pros who don't know anything, the F5 was very well designed and worked even better. Frankly its follow-focusing was and is better than most of the DSLR's now!

A minor point, but worth remembering that a pro SLR body was made for a different job than a tiny P&S rangefinder...you don't blame a hammer for not being an eyeglasses screwdriver.

 

[Mustafa Umut Sarac]

japanese manufacturers find out big things sell big , look at their amps etc. They give self respect and control feel when lots of people lack in their life. you are 70s hippie , your mother father sister brother uncle job owner customer the man on the street hates you and you cant control it , buy a tascam reel to reel , linn turntable , marantz amp and klipsch speaker , you are again in control of lots of things.

 

[NB23]

Most of the Leica R cameras are particularly small.

Yes they are. But this is what happens on the internet: a festival of misinformations

 

[cuthbert]

Hoo boy...

Nikon's still making the F6, so I'd say they didn't finish anything with the F5, except perhaps a lot of the competition. As one of those 'dumb' pros who don't know anything, the F5 was very well designed and worked even better. Frankly its follow-focusing was and is better than most of the DSLR's now!

A minor point, but worth remembering that a pro SLR body was made for a different job than a tiny P&S rangefinder...you don't blame a hammer for not being an eyeglasses screwdriver.

The F5 was the crowning of that design tendency to make the things big because bigger->better in the mind of some "pros", the F6 is smaller for what I've been told but to be honest I miss the FM3 much more than the Nikon monsters. The comment regarding "finish off the competitors" is simply hilarious because it's more likely that Nikon is still selling old stock F6s and the production has finished long time ago.

Still after the demise of the F2 the best professional body they made was the Nikon FM2, certainly not the F3,4,5,6 etc...etc...that was a great little camera.

Yes they are. But this is what happens on the internet: a festival of misinformations

Indeed: there are still people who think the R3,4,5,6 and 7 were made by Leica and not by Minolta!!!

 

[darkosaric]

Still after the demise of the F2 the best professional body they made was the Nikon FM2, certainly not the F3,4,5,6 etc...etc...that was a great little camera.

I am afraid that we will go off topic of original posting, but ...

Best nikon is F3, then F. I had those FM's and FE's - not as good as F3 and F. I had F2 as well - sold it - original F feels better. I used in past almost all nikons (except F4, F5, F6 and FM3A) and F3 is the best.
About FM/FE --> If you are shooting B&W and printing in the darkroom, full frame - then you start to appreciate 100% viewfinder.

 

[NB23]

The F5 was the crowning of that design tendency to make the things big because bigger->better in the mind of some "pros", the F6 is smaller for what I've been told but to be honest I miss the FM3 much more than the Nikon monsters. The comment regarding "finish off the competitors" is simply hilarious because it's more likely that Nikon is still selling old stock F6s and the production has finished long time ago.

Still after the demise of the F2 the best professional body they made was the Nikon FM2, certainly not the F3,4,5,6 etc...etc...that was a great little camera.



Indeed: there are still people who think the R3,4,5,6 and 7 were made by Leica and not by Minolta!!!

As if Minolta was bad.
Yawn.

You sure sound like a camera information God. Besides being a camera fanboy, is talent following?

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Why did the physically smaller Japanese come up w/such big, heavy Pro equipment (Nikon, Mamiya), while the bigger Germans came up w/smaller, lighter equipment (Leica, Rollei)?? (And there's no racism in my question)

Because they were after American market where everything is in XXXL. Including Graflex camera.

But for me Oly is as Pro and Leica is. Honorable Jane Bown was using OM.

 

[Pioneer]

Hmm, I don't think I see it.

The Contarex and the Nikon F are actually pretty close in size and weight. Both come from the same time period. The Contarex may be a bit uglier because of the big cyclops looking meter on the front but I'm not sure a Photomic finder looks all that gorgeous plopped on the top of the Nikon.

Rangefinders were also very similar in size between the two countries. Since the Japanese used the German designs as their stepping off point I suppose that could be expected.