Re: optics/Japan

[David Dockstader <DRDOCK00@UKCC.UKY.EDU>]

On Tue, 04 Nov 1997 19:28:04 -0600 brian whatcott said:
> This, no doubt, an off-the-wall question.
> Perhaps you would help me.
>
> During the years ( or perhaps soon after) when Mcarthur was
> acting as Governor of Japan, the Japanese seemed to take a giant
> step forward in developing their first leading edge industry:
> cameras. Their optics were reputed to be superior.
> Returning GIs spread the word.
>
> They seemed to wrench the personal cinecamera market from Paillard-Bolex
> and all those lesser lights.
I've never been into cine myself, but my understanding is that while Japanese
optics were good their film transport for cine cameras was never up to
top standards.

> They seemed to wrench the still camera market away from Voigtlander,
> Rolleiflex and all the rest.
Although Japanese optics are good, it was price that allowed the Japanese
to dominate the 35mm camera market.  Early Cannon and Nikon equipment was
little more than clones of Leitz and Zeiss.  I personally own a substantial
accumulation of Nikon equipment, including a number of Nikon and Zeiss cameras
and lenses from the 50's.  I have carefully examined aerial images from these
lenses, as well as those from Cannon and Leitz from the same era and have
found that the German lenses are almost always superior.  In similar testing
of more modern lenses I have not been able to see any differences, however,
Leitz and Zeiss still command a premium price in the market place.  At one
point in my career I was involved in making resolution test targets.  To
produce these targets I made a series of photographic reductions of a master
scribed on a glass plate.  The final reduction was made on a special emulsion
coated on glass plates with a Nikon f1.2 lens that was virtually diffraction
limited at full aperature over a 3mm field. We were able to resolve over
1800 lines/mm, but the only microscope lenses we could find good enough to
evaluate our work came from Zeiss.  (The Nikon lens was a special purpose
optic and not something designed for general purpose photography.)

My point is that the Japanese optics have evolved and improved over the years
and the Japanense offer some unique designs.  For general photography the best
of the German optics were clearly superior in the 50's, but today any
differences in quality are almost impossible to detect. However, there are
still some special applications where the Germans still hold the edge.

> I have this sense that some facet of the US led national reorganization
> played a part - perhaps with physical optics classes in schools.
>
> No doubt the tonic effect of being vanquished in war played an
> important part too: see how Germany rebounded. Italy is doing rather well.
> One could even argue that Vietnam did something for us, for that matter.
>
> Was there an optical teaching initiative affecting Japan you know of?
>
> Sincerely
>
>
>
> brian whatcott <inet@intellisys.net>
> Altus OK