Re: [Leica] Nikon S3 war

[Stephen Gandy <leicanikon@earthlink.net>]

Well Marc,

Considering that the NY Times which broke the Nikon Lens story in December of
1950, Modern Photography and Popular Photography which repeated the story,  and
every photo reference book I have read on the subject disagrees with your
version,  what is the source or sources of your claim  ??

According to a June 1951 Modern Photography article written by John Wolbarst,
the camera editor of the New York Times, Jacob Deschin, broke the Nikon story in
December 1950 saying

"The first post-war Japanese camera to attract serious attention in America has
created a sensation among magazine and press photographers following the report
by Life photographers in Korea that a Japanese 35mm camera and its lenses had
proved superior to the German cameras  they had been using.  The camera is the
Nikon...The lenses...are the Nikkor."

According to Wolbarst in the Modern Photo article, the first photog to discover
Nikon lenses was Horace Bristol, who in turn introduced Nikon lenses to David
Duncan, Carl Mydans, and Hank Walker, Life war photogs.   Wolbarst says that
"virtually all" of DDD Life pics of the War were with Nikon lenses.  He also
says that "Mydans, Walker, and later John Dominis, also of Life, used the Nikkor
lenses almost exclusively for their Korean war coverage.    Life the had the
camera and lenses tested by optical experts to see if they really were as good
as their men said.  Their experts said that the were."

It is worth mentioning that DDD used screw mount Nikkors on his Leica.  In
practical terms it would seem he was saying that the Nikkors were better than
Leica lenses at the time.   Most notable were the 50/1.4 and 85/2 Nikkors --
focal lengths and speeds that Leica did not match well in sharpness.  Leica's
two comparable lenses were the 50/1.5 Summarit and 85/1.5 Summarex -- neither of
which is generally considered sharp  at wider apertures.     While Zeiss made a
limited number of wartime Leica mount lenses,  photogs could not go into the
camera store and order new Zeiss lenses in Leica mount.  I've been told DDD
particularly liked the 85/2 Nikkor.  It was a different optical design than the
Zeiss 85/2 Sonnar, which Wolbarst notes in his article.


So Marc, beyond your source(s), what proof do you have that your source was
telling you the truth,  and not just taking in a gullible mark ?

Also, where did you get your claimed $10 cost of Nikon lenses  ??    The  Nikkor
prices  as reported by Wolbarst are $89.50 for the 35/3.5, $54.50 for the
50/3.5, $107 for the 50/2, $198 for the 50/1.4, $175.50 for the 85/2, and
$154.50 for the 135/3.5.

Stephen Gandy

Marc James Small wrote:

> At 09:43 AM 2/26/2000 -0600, Fred Zimmerman wrote:
> >  The adoption of Nikon lenses is discussed in a fine book by Robert
> >Rotoloni, The Nikon Rangefinder Camera: an Illustrated History of the Nikon
> >Rangefinder Cameras, Lenses and Accessories, 2nd ed., Hove, 1983.
>
> And this is the tale that was concocted to hood-wink the photo editors back
> in the states.  The tale is not entirely false, just pumped up quite a bit.
>  The test WAS run, as Duncan didn't want to come back from Korea with a
> bunch of fuzzy and unuseable shots.  Once he saw that the Japanese lenses
> produced images as good as his German glass he was content.  The rest was
> eye-wash for the home crew.
>
> Marc
>
> msmall@roanoke.infi.net  FAX:  +540/343-7315
> Cha robh bas fir gun ghras fir!