My Ciro 35 looks like it was cast with some sort of zinc alloy. The quality of the molding is pretty crummy too. The Cee-ay 35 I have which was made in the exact same molds, only earlier seems to be cast much better.
I guess we should sum up on which senses metals are of influence:
-) visual appearance
May be the metal itself or a coating. Though in case of metal coating not all kind of metal coatings are applied to all base metals.
-) weight
Depends on density but also in the strength of the metal.
It's important to distinguish between the chassis and the covers. Most older cameras have an aluminum alloy chassis and brass top and bottom plates. As I recall, the later Minolta-based Leica SLR's had die cast zinc covers.
Magnesium alloy started to come into use later, with the latest pro-level cameras being made differently as well- a cast body which constitutes the exterior as well as the chassis.
The LX has a die-cast aluminum body and cover plates, which are anodized and clear-coated. Titanium cameras, like the OM-4T, LX Titanium, Nikon F3T, etc, have titanium covers, not titanium chassis.
Brass was used widely as a cover material because it was soft enough to be easily drawn into the shapes needed, yet would deform rather than crack from impact. Being easy to shape with few problems, it was well suited to mass production.
The D300 is of the modern design without separate top and bottom covers. The M9 has a a magnesium chassis, with top and bottom covers "machined from blocks of solid brass" to quote the brochure.
I am afraid I will have to leave it here because an additional post with a few more brands was blocked for some reason or another. Perhaps because I gave an example of brands that are not approved of.
I am quite sure that is NOT the reason your post failed to show. There are NO censors here pre-reading and blocking posts, and certainly no camera-brand preferential treatment. The moderators use a very light touch around here, and rely on us to police ourselves. They only step in when it is really necessary, and I have never seen them remove a post, even an offensive one. Maybe your ISP had a glitch or something at the same time you tried to post.
I am afraid I will have to leave it here because an additional post with a few more brands was blocked for some reason or another. Perhaps because I gave an example of brands that are not approved of.
I don't think I will be posting anything else in the near future. I will return to being just a reader as I have been in the past.
I'm not sure what you're talking about, we certainly don't block content like that. There are times when the spam guard will accidentally mark something as spam depending on the link formatting. Feel free to raise a helpdesk ticket if you want me to investigate:
I am quite sure that is NOT the reason your post failed to show. There are NO censors here pre-reading and blocking posts, and certainly no camera-brand preferential treatment. The moderators use a very light touch around here, and rely on us to police ourselves. They only step in when it is really necessary, and I have never seen them remove a post, even an offensive one. Maybe your ISP had a glitch or something at the same time you tried to post.
I was reminded privately by another member that offensive posts have been removed by the moderators. I had forgotten about that. The posts were excessively combative or insulting, and usually not related to the thread topic. The deletions are noted, and usually have a short explanation from the moderator.
Also, spam has been removed.