Replicas of classic cameras

[Sparrow]

If someone started making replicas of classic cameras, like they do with classic cars, exact copies same materials same engineering tolerance same lubricants, would you buy say a brand new M2 or Nikon F without the trademarks?

With modern casting methods, short run CNC machine tools and machining centers have come a long way since the 1950s so the costs should have come down rather than up, and obviously there’s no R&D cost to add in.

 

[Wimpler]

Cost will be a lot higher because the production number will have to be significantly lower. I don't think anybody would succeed in selling, for example, 20.000 cameras of the same model a year. Also, reverse engeneering all camera parts will be harder then just developing a new camera (just thinking about how many camera parts a shutter has and you will get nightmares). Also, wages and metal prices have increased significantly.

It would be a lot easier and cheaper to develop a new camera, using shutters (and other parts) that are currently available and putting them in a classic style high quality metal housing. The metal housing could ofcourse be copied to resemble an existing camera.

 

[Sonnar Brian]

Well, I bought an S3-2000. But, the price was less than 1/2 of its introduction price. The Sp-2005 were made in fewer numbers and did not fall as dramatically.

Too many Nikon F's and F2's were made to compete with. The M2 is a good choice for economy of scale as it is essentially an MP without a meter.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Dear Stewart,

It's a fascinating idea, but I don't think it could be made to fly.

Many classic designs are extremely labour intensive to build, because they were designed in an era when highly skilled labour was far cheaper than today. This is one reason why traditional Leica Ms cost so much. You can't substitute unskilled labour, obviously.

Although there's no 'R+D' in one sense, the cost of creating the drawings from which to run the CNC programs would be very high.

Finally, few if any camera 'classics' are currently so valuable to a user as to make a replica more attractive than a rebuilt original. Very, very few things are made as replicas for this very reason, though Brough Superior motorcycles are still (or were recently) made to 1930s designs.

Most other so-called 'replicas' tend to be a mixture of modern ingredients and engineering with specially-made imitations of older parts, or even 'homages' -- designs in the spirit of the past, with the look of the past, but much more modern engineering under the hood.

Yes, there are many 'replicas' in the gun world, but a gun is a much simpler piece of engineering than a camera or a motor car (or motorcycle).

Cheers,

Roger

 

[ray*j*gun]

The question was would we buy such a camera? Well, tech issues aside, I think the Nikon S3 2000 was such a camera and one reason I bought it was because it was a perfect replica of a great camera. If we are truthful a large part of our buying decision is based on the heart. Love the idea.....hope it gets legs!

Ray

If someone started making replicas of classic cameras, like they do with classic cars, exact copies same materials same engineering tolerance same lubricants, would you buy say a brand new M2 or Nikon F without the trademarks?

With modern casting methods, short run CNC machine tools and machining centers have come a long way since the 1950s so the costs should have come down rather than up, and obviously there’s no R&D cost to add in.