NZDavid Posted May 23, 2009 Share #21 Posted May 23, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) This begs another question - why would any manufacturer make something that lasted for ever, didn't wear out, or need a service once in a while? Leica falls dangerously close to this category. Of course all things mechanical do need a CLA once in a while, but are damn reliable in between times. But I think many people -- and I suspect the majority on this forum -- are heartily sick of poorly made crappy plasticky products that fall apart or become outdated after a few years. People still appreciate quality craftsmanship that is built to last. It is this aspect, as well as superb technical performance, that accounts for Leica's continuing appeal. Craftsmanship is also why people still like mechanical wristwatches. There are quite a few small watchmaking businesses that concentrate on quality, not quantity. Their market does not have to be huge and keep expanding forever; it just has to be sustainable. Stowa and Sinn are other examples from Germany. Kenneth, with the Damasko watches (Damasko - feiner Uhrenbau), did you see "oil-free escapement" under the technology heading (English version)? It looks like an interesting piece of technology. I wonder if there would be applications for camera manufacture? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 23, 2009 Posted May 23, 2009 Hi NZDavid, Take a look here The Achilles heel of camera and watches?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
kenneth Posted May 24, 2009 Author Share #22 Posted May 24, 2009 David- No I hadn't until you mentioned it- interesting but I guess it does not solve the viscosity issue around mechanical devices, but if we did not think out of the box we would all be still living in wattle and daub houses Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NZDavid Posted May 24, 2009 Share #23 Posted May 24, 2009 To quote Seven of Nine, "Resistance is futile." Even in space there's friction! Here on Earth, we've got better oils now. I think it's interesting that development of existing, so called mature technology (old tech as opposed to high tech, an overhyped word anyway) is still continuing. Sometimes, older designs do the job better than newer designs; they just need tweaking and improving. Though it may be heresy for some to say so. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenneth Posted May 24, 2009 Author Share #24 Posted May 24, 2009 Yes I agree but the whole world now seems to chant the new is better mantra Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob_x2004 Posted May 24, 2009 Share #25 Posted May 24, 2009 People still appreciate quality craftsmanship that is built to last. I think people confuse expensive design, expensively made, with competent design, quality and craftsmanship. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenneth Posted May 24, 2009 Author Share #26 Posted May 24, 2009 I think people confuse expensive design, expensively made, with competent design, quality and craftsmanship. Really, elucidate Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenneth Posted May 24, 2009 Author Share #27 Posted May 24, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Only an idiot could argue with your response. Can I ask, are you in James gang or is he in yours? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dkCambridgeshire Posted May 24, 2009 Share #28 Posted May 24, 2009 My Nokia phone keeps perfect time, I have it with me all times and I don't see the point in wearing an expensive piece of jewellery. If you buy a Leica because you want to use Leica lenses, because you feel they are technically the best at what they do, why would you bother with a troublesome unreliable inefficient piece of jewellery to wear on your wrist which will give you an approximate time at best? I value my Dornblüth just as much as my Leica cameras ... and do not regard it as troublesome or unreliable jewellery in any way ... D.Dornblth & Sohn » START EN ... and it keeps excellent and accurate time to within one second a day last time it was tested ... Cheers dunk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenneth Posted May 24, 2009 Author Share #29 Posted May 24, 2009 I value my Dornblüth just as much as my Leica cameras ... and do not regard it as troublesome or unreliable jewellery in any way ... D.Dornblth & Sohn » START EN ... and it keeps excellent and accurate time to within one second a day last time it was tested ... Cheers dunk Unfortunately, like many threads started on this forum the points scoring brigade seem incapable of commenting without adding some infantile jibe. It seems to me that if they don't have something grown up and of value to contribute they would be better keeping quite but one has to remember that there is also unfinished business in and around these comments which sadly high jack the threads and spoils it for others with something sensible to to say Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dkCambridgeshire Posted May 24, 2009 Share #30 Posted May 24, 2009 Unfortunately, like many threads started on this forum the points scoring brigade seem incapable of commenting without adding some infantile jibe. It seems to me that if they don't have something grown up and of value to contribute they would be better keeping quite but one has to remember that there is also unfinished business in and around these comments which sadly high jack the threads and spoils it for others with something sensible to to say Which is precisely what you have just done . My comment was meant to be constructive by mentioning that the watch manufacturer as well as Leica takes a pride in his precision engineering. I will also mention the well known English watchmaker George Daniels who invented the lubrication free co-axial watch escapement used in Omega watches. dunk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenneth Posted May 24, 2009 Author Share #31 Posted May 24, 2009 Which is precisely what you have just done . My comment was meant to be constructive by mentioning that the watch manufacturer as well as Leica takes a pride in his precision engineering. I will also mention the well known English watchmaker George Daniels who invented the lubrication free co-axial watch escapement used in Omega watches. dunk I am sorry but my comments were not aimed at your post in fact just the opposite. Apologies if it seemed that way. Your comments regarding the two watchmakers is most interesting but I am mindful about not trying to develop this thread into a wristwatch thread as not everyone seems as interested in the subject as you and I. Iassume you are familiar with this site World of Time : Horomundi Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dkCambridgeshire Posted May 24, 2009 Share #32 Posted May 24, 2009 Reciprocal apologies. Let us put the matter down to a misunderstanding then. Best wishes dunk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
StS Posted May 24, 2009 Share #33 Posted May 24, 2009 The general opinion is to keep lubricated mechanisms moving to avoid resinfying of the oils. Modern synthetic oils are said to be less prone to this effect, since they are cleaner. I bought a mechanical watch in 1994 and have it in daily use since then. I had it in service about one year ago, the bill would have bought a good quartz watch. There are lithium batteries for quartz watches on the market which claim to last for 20 years - such a combination would probably demand less attention compared to a mechanical watch. Of course there is still the emotional factor - the ticking of a mechanical watch sounds nicer (which could be easily copied by the quarts clock makers, if the stepper motor would get four time more steps ) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenneth Posted May 25, 2009 Author Share #34 Posted May 25, 2009 The general opinion is to keep lubricated mechanisms moving to avoid resinfying of the oils. Modern synthetic oils are said to be less prone to this effect, since they are cleaner. I bought a mechanical watch in 1994 and have it in daily use since then. I had it in service about one year ago, the bill would have bought a good quartz watch. There are lithium batteries for quartz watches on the market which claim to last for 20 years - such a combination would probably demand less attention compared to a mechanical watch. Of course there is still the emotional factor - the ticking of a mechanical watch sounds nicer (which could be easily copied by the quarts clock makers, if the stepper motor would get four time more steps ) You are right, it is an emotional factor and yes servicing can be very expensive but having said that I was a little disappointed with the erratic behavior of my Jaeger Lecoultre watch given that it is only 3 years old, only worn occasionally but always kept wound. I will report back on the outcome Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
likea Posted May 25, 2009 Share #35 Posted May 25, 2009 Get a grammar book. It's cheaper than a new lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pierovitch Posted May 25, 2009 Share #36 Posted May 25, 2009 Drowned my last mechanical watch. An allegedly waterproof Omega Seamaster. Been digital ever since. You could go totally non mechanical and have a GPS corrected sundial. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenneth Posted May 25, 2009 Author Share #37 Posted May 25, 2009 Drowned my last mechanical watch. An allegedly waterproof Omega Seamaster. Been digital ever since. You could go totally non mechanical and have a GPS corrected sundial. One can only assume that you did not keep up to your servicing on your Omega. The seals start to fail after a certain time and you risk water ingress but I guess the instruction that came with your watch told you that so you have only yourself to blame As has be discussed earlier. It is an emotional thing this appreciation of mechanical watches as is the case with Leica mechanical cameras. Items which, if serviced regularly will function flawlessly without having to resort to batteries to make the devise work and also a connection to a skilled craftsman who built it in the first place. My Jaeger watch which I mentioned earlier has had to go back to Switzerland due to erratic timekeeping but it hasn't just gone back to the factory it has gone back to the person who assembled it 3 years ago now that is what I call connection. But for sure a cheap digital watch will keep perfect time just as a Holga camera will produce acceptable photographs but, by being here you must have an emotional link to quality but don't blame Leica if you don't keep up to your servicing, as you seem to be, wrongly blaming Omega Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pierovitch Posted May 25, 2009 Share #38 Posted May 25, 2009 One can only assume that you did not keep up to your servicing on your Omega. The seals start to fail after a certain time and you risk water ingress but I guess the instruction that came with your watch told you that so you have only yourself to blame A I found out that water resistance does not mean waterproof. The watch had been serviced by Omega when one the hands came off due to shock caused by chopping wood. The seals were not up to being in the sun on a 100 degree day and rapid cooling when I dove into a river. This was back in the late 70's when i was a little more active. It had previously survived high board diving. I do treat cameras with more respect. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenneth Posted May 25, 2009 Author Share #39 Posted May 25, 2009 I found out that water resistance does not mean waterproof. The watch had been serviced by Omega when one the hands came off due to shock caused by chopping wood. The seals were not up to being in the sun on a 100 degree day and rapid cooling when I dove into a river. This was back in the late 70's when i was a little more active. It had previously survived high board diving. I do treat cameras with more respect. It might be worth having it re furbished after all it is a classic timepiece which will not date. I noted your comment on waterproof v water resistance and I am sure alot of people get confused by that one. I am fortunate that my second watch is a Rolex which is guaranteed swim proof, the only problem there is I cannot swim but it does mean I can wear it and forget about it. My Jaeger, on the other hand is guaranteed waterproof to 50 meters but as it has a leather strap fitted I don't take it near water. I believe that Leica M cameras are water resistant but I assume that only means falling rain as opposed to immersion but it obviously gives one piece of mind when taken out without a case Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted May 25, 2009 Share #40 Posted May 25, 2009 Kenneth Leica M cameras are notoriously poorly weather sealed. I never let mine get wet, even in a light shower. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.