Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/11/30

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: RE: [Leica] God, no Canon vs. Nikon...
From: dmorton@journalist.co.uk (David Morton)
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 18:29 +0000 (GMT Standard Time)

Kotsinadelis, Peter wrote:

> Eric, its partially true.  A larger opening/lens mount provides more 
> space
> for things like electrical contacts.  Minolta changed theirs when they 
> came
> out with the Maxxum for technical reasons as documented in Sam 
> Kusumoto's
> autobiography (he was the President at the time, I have a copy of this 
> book
> if you are interested.)  Canon did it because their FD mount was passe.
> Nikon thought it would provide a sort of investment protection, but the
> limited diameter is problematic since you have to constantly look 
> backward
> (for compatibility) to advance forward.  Minolta and Canon avoided MF 
> lens
> compatibility issue by changing mounts entirely.  Smart move!  


I was trying to avoid comment to this thread, as it's so far off topic, 
but *some* of us think Nikon 'did the decent thing' with the lens mount. 

The F5 (& F100) using the latest AFS lenses out perform Canon's AF system 
*using the old Nikon mount*. When my D1 arrives, I will be able to use all 
my old manual focus lenses on it. Changing lens mounts and destroying 
snappers' cash flow may be fun for Canon, but it was a *LARGE* pain in the 
gluteus maximus for many of its customers.

David Morton
dmorton@journalist.co.uk