I'll keep things civil & respond to each of your points below.
chendayuan said:
Leica put its first 35mm on the market around 1925, Contax I on the market around 1932, and Contax's Rf is about 20-30% higher than leica's due to high manufacture cost, the high price does not make Contax a durable, more accurate camera. Leica's first 50/3.5 Anastigmat/Elmax use 1-1-3 optical formula instead of Zeiss Tessar 1-1-2, because the patent infringe. It is the same as to Leica's shutter design.
Your analogy to the Elmar & Tessar is appropriate. However, you can only assert, not prove, that each company made its decision *entirely* based on avoiding patent infringement. Of course patents influenced Leitz's decision to not copy the Tessar & of course patents influenced Zeiss Ikon's decision to develop a different shutter for the Contax. What you can't do is prove that the patent was the main motivation & inspiration behind each decision. Shutters aside, you ignore the obvious fact that the Contax had a superior RF to the TM Leicas, which accounts for part of the higher manufacture cost for the Contax.
The Contax shutter is not more accurate than leica’s they are both mechanical controlled, the Contax 1/1250 is only around 1/1000, most leica's 1/1000 is also around 1/900.
This is a wash as I've heard different things from different camera technicians, & no one out there has tested enough shutters to make any other than an educated guess.
As to the durability, up to today there are still lots of working Leica II/III but not Contax I/II, Zeiss lens and Leica outlast these Contax.
I'll repeat the points I made in the previous (deleted) thread & in my previous response on this thread: (1) many, many more Leicas were made than Contaxes; & (2) the fact that the Leica shutter is simpler & requires less maintenance does not in & of itself make it a better design unless simplicity & ease of maintenance are your only criteria--the Contax was made w/the expectation that it would be maintained by skilled technicians.
During the World War II military selected Leica not Contax as their main photography tools, is this mean some thing?
Another wash. The German Air Force & Army used Leicas, but the Navy used Contaxes. From my knowledge of gov't procurement, you can't assume that such decisions are made solely on technical superiority. Moreover, outside Germany, the Contax, not the Leica, was the system of choice for most photojournalistic establishments (e.g., Time-Life) & many famed photographers (e.g., Ansel Adams, Robert Capa) notwithstanding Leica's "1st mover advantage" (greater installed base) & lower prices.
Burned hole on LEica shutter curtain can happen, but very rare, face strong sun for a while even the titanium on SP can not survive.
In the absence of statistics you can only assert, not prove, that burned shutter curtains are "very rare." Folks on this forum alone, hardly a large sample, have provided real life examples of it happening.
My point is the the cloth shutter curtain is easy to replace even today at reasonable cost, it is impossible to replace Contax/Canon/Nikon metal shutter curtain at reasonable cost. if you replace leica shutter curtain yourself, it only cost few dollars at most. So all in all Leica's shutter design is simple durable relaible and reasonable accurate, easy to repair even toady. .
1st, to repeat another response from the earlier deleted thread, you ignore the simple fact that, unlike Leicas, the Contax/Canon/Nikon metal shutter curtains
rarely have to be replaced. That's a bit like saying that's its better to make clothes out of paper because you can just throw them away rather than having to wash them; they may work in the doctor's office, but doesn't generally hold true for going out in the street. 2nd, it is not
unreasonably expensive to get a Contax/Canon/Nikon shutter curtain replaced & while you can get away w/using an old sock or whatever to serve as a Leica shutter, the technically-correct rubberized cloth is not something you buy @ the corner hardware store.
