NickTrop
Veteran
Starting with (to the best of my knowledge) the Olympus XA, several Japanese camera manufacturers in the late-70's/early-80's began incorporating a curious "splash of red", usually in the form of a "dot" somewhere on their all-black compact camera designs. Three such camera come to mind:
1. The aforementioned XA
2. The Pentax PC 35 AF
3. The Nikon L35 AF
If one peruses the chatter about these cameras, it is not uncommon for someone to point out the "curious" design/color choice of having a reddish orange shutter release button on an otherwise matte black camera. This is especially true of the Pentax, where its shutter release sits above the top plate and literally sticks out like a sore thumb. Some complain it makes this otherwise slick design, that still holds up today, look rather cheesy. The XA garners less complaints of this curious design choice because the shutter release is level with the top plate and that splash of red less noticeable.
And while the Nikon left its shutter release black matching the rest of the camera, it did incorporate the same reddish-orange color to the upside down "hockey stick" to the left of the lens (right if you're facing) where the textured grip is. Less conspicuous but it's there and an equally curious color choice front and (left of) center.
I never quite understood why such design choices were in question. Obviously, this is related to "the red dot" that a certain upmarket camera maker is known the world over for. For me, the question is, what was first Olympus, then Pentax, and finally Nikon trying to communicate by incorporating an overt Leica visual cue? What were their motives?
To assess this trivial and arcane issue, one must understand what these three cameras represented at the time they were introduced. The XA was a revolutionary camera -- a tiny aperture priority rangefinder with a unique clamshell design and a specially-designed lens. Next, the PC 35AF was Pentax's first active auto focus camera, also incorporating a clamshell design. Finally came the Nikon "Pikaichi" -- or top notch. Any owner of this camera will appreciate that it was, indeed, "top notch". Its ergonomics borrow heavily from Leica and it included a revolutionary wide-angle sonnar lens design to give it an optical quality edge in the marketplace.
(Another curiosity about this lens is that is was not branded as "Nikkor". My assumption is that Nikon did not want to *******ize their more profitable Nikkor sales. Consider -- what would a Nikkor 35mm, f2.8 autofocus PANCAKE lens of a sonnar design that is a fine performer sell for as a standalone autofocus fixed lens -- even today? Because, that's what this lens is! This lens, desite not having the Nikkor designation, was indeed designed and produced by Nikon. But I, as always, digress...)
In essense, each camera represented "firsts" and "the pride of..." each of the respective camera manufacturers at the time. And, perhaps in the minds of the Japanese camera companies, they were attempting to communicate "something" in the market.
As for was what they were attempting to communicate, several possiblities come to mind:
1. The Neo-Leica M (or Barnak) Theory
Positioning each of these historic cameras as "the new Leica". No need to set your camera to f5.6 and infinity focus -- let the camera's "electronic brain" set the aperature and shutter speed and focus for you -- in an instant! This is what HBC would be using if he had any sense! These are the new documentary cameras, the new "Leica's, the new "street shooters"!
2. The "Leica Killer" Theory
Related to the above, but harsher. The red "dot" indicating they were taking over the "red dot" cameras from their German counter-parts. They're coming to get you Leica! You are the sole survivor. Yes, "you are legend", the Robert Neville of German camera makers... And these robot-vampire cameras will be the death of you. Mwhahahahaha!
3. The Leica Substitute Economic Good Theory
Yes, yes -- we know... You have Leica lust. But a Leica is still out of your economic grasp. Here, try these. Look $200 USD (in circa 1981 dollars) you can swing, right? And, they're pretty darned good cameras... they even come with a "red dot". Oh -- they'll focus for you too.
4. The Leica "Tip of the Cap" Theory
We know the Japanese love their cameras and respect their German counter-parts, especially Leica (until they have to work jointly with them, as Minolta might attest...). The splash of red is a tribute.
5. The Leica Subliminal Ad Theory
You know you REALLY came into the camera shop to buy that used M you've had your eye on... What's this new Pentax behind the glass... Why am I so drawn to it? It's as if it's calling to me! I. can. not. resist. Must. purchase. That camera over there, please. No, I don't want to try it -- just give it to me. Hurry!
6. Leica Has Nothing to Do With It You Moron!
Take a look at the Japanese flag. Good. Now look at the camera. Now look at the flag. Back to the camera...
What's the truth of the "Japanese red dot", we may never know. Alls I know is there's an outdoor music festival a half-mile from my humbe abode, an event that was made for street shooting. The weather is nice, the light is great... and I have several cameras laying in wait -- hoping to get the call. What "Leica" will I shoot with today? The Pentax PC35af? The XA? The Nikon L35af?
I think today I'll go with the Nikon, looking very Leica-like and regal -- despite costing me $1.00 US, with its vintage thin black leather strap and 46mm vented lens hood.
Very Leica-like indeed.
1. The aforementioned XA
2. The Pentax PC 35 AF
3. The Nikon L35 AF
If one peruses the chatter about these cameras, it is not uncommon for someone to point out the "curious" design/color choice of having a reddish orange shutter release button on an otherwise matte black camera. This is especially true of the Pentax, where its shutter release sits above the top plate and literally sticks out like a sore thumb. Some complain it makes this otherwise slick design, that still holds up today, look rather cheesy. The XA garners less complaints of this curious design choice because the shutter release is level with the top plate and that splash of red less noticeable.
And while the Nikon left its shutter release black matching the rest of the camera, it did incorporate the same reddish-orange color to the upside down "hockey stick" to the left of the lens (right if you're facing) where the textured grip is. Less conspicuous but it's there and an equally curious color choice front and (left of) center.
I never quite understood why such design choices were in question. Obviously, this is related to "the red dot" that a certain upmarket camera maker is known the world over for. For me, the question is, what was first Olympus, then Pentax, and finally Nikon trying to communicate by incorporating an overt Leica visual cue? What were their motives?
To assess this trivial and arcane issue, one must understand what these three cameras represented at the time they were introduced. The XA was a revolutionary camera -- a tiny aperture priority rangefinder with a unique clamshell design and a specially-designed lens. Next, the PC 35AF was Pentax's first active auto focus camera, also incorporating a clamshell design. Finally came the Nikon "Pikaichi" -- or top notch. Any owner of this camera will appreciate that it was, indeed, "top notch". Its ergonomics borrow heavily from Leica and it included a revolutionary wide-angle sonnar lens design to give it an optical quality edge in the marketplace.
(Another curiosity about this lens is that is was not branded as "Nikkor". My assumption is that Nikon did not want to *******ize their more profitable Nikkor sales. Consider -- what would a Nikkor 35mm, f2.8 autofocus PANCAKE lens of a sonnar design that is a fine performer sell for as a standalone autofocus fixed lens -- even today? Because, that's what this lens is! This lens, desite not having the Nikkor designation, was indeed designed and produced by Nikon. But I, as always, digress...)
In essense, each camera represented "firsts" and "the pride of..." each of the respective camera manufacturers at the time. And, perhaps in the minds of the Japanese camera companies, they were attempting to communicate "something" in the market.
As for was what they were attempting to communicate, several possiblities come to mind:
1. The Neo-Leica M (or Barnak) Theory
Positioning each of these historic cameras as "the new Leica". No need to set your camera to f5.6 and infinity focus -- let the camera's "electronic brain" set the aperature and shutter speed and focus for you -- in an instant! This is what HBC would be using if he had any sense! These are the new documentary cameras, the new "Leica's, the new "street shooters"!
2. The "Leica Killer" Theory
Related to the above, but harsher. The red "dot" indicating they were taking over the "red dot" cameras from their German counter-parts. They're coming to get you Leica! You are the sole survivor. Yes, "you are legend", the Robert Neville of German camera makers... And these robot-vampire cameras will be the death of you. Mwhahahahaha!
3. The Leica Substitute Economic Good Theory
Yes, yes -- we know... You have Leica lust. But a Leica is still out of your economic grasp. Here, try these. Look $200 USD (in circa 1981 dollars) you can swing, right? And, they're pretty darned good cameras... they even come with a "red dot". Oh -- they'll focus for you too.
4. The Leica "Tip of the Cap" Theory
We know the Japanese love their cameras and respect their German counter-parts, especially Leica (until they have to work jointly with them, as Minolta might attest...). The splash of red is a tribute.
5. The Leica Subliminal Ad Theory
You know you REALLY came into the camera shop to buy that used M you've had your eye on... What's this new Pentax behind the glass... Why am I so drawn to it? It's as if it's calling to me! I. can. not. resist. Must. purchase. That camera over there, please. No, I don't want to try it -- just give it to me. Hurry!
6. Leica Has Nothing to Do With It You Moron!
Take a look at the Japanese flag. Good. Now look at the camera. Now look at the flag. Back to the camera...
What's the truth of the "Japanese red dot", we may never know. Alls I know is there's an outdoor music festival a half-mile from my humbe abode, an event that was made for street shooting. The weather is nice, the light is great... and I have several cameras laying in wait -- hoping to get the call. What "Leica" will I shoot with today? The Pentax PC35af? The XA? The Nikon L35af?
I think today I'll go with the Nikon, looking very Leica-like and regal -- despite costing me $1.00 US, with its vintage thin black leather strap and 46mm vented lens hood.
Very Leica-like indeed.
De_Corday
Eternal Student
AFAIK, the red accent started entering Nikon design via Giorgetto Giugiaro, with the F3 in 1981. 'twas a red line.
NickTrop
Veteran
7. Giorgetto Giugiaro was assigned the job of designing a camera and just stole the design from Leica. Hey -- he's a designer! That's what they do! But they'll tell you they were "inspired by", of course. Why do you think they all keep scrap books and collect stuff? It's for "inspiration", you see. (Pareto's 80/20 rule was invented for designers. Only 20% of designers actually design stuff, and provide "the inspiration" for the other 80%.)
Graham Line
Well-known
GG also did automotive design. The Volkswagen GTI, for example, sported a couple of bright red accents to catch the eye and set it apart for run-of-the-mill Golfs.
The cleverness lies in knowing where and how to apply borrowed themes.
NickTrop
Veteran
Now that you mention it, my Nikon L35 AF does bear uncanny resemblance to the Volkswagen GTI. Very clever use of borrowed design, indeed!
aizan
Veteran
it has nothing to do with the leica red dot. the use of accent colors is pervasive in industrial design, and black and red is a common color combination. most consumer electronics have color coded buttons and graphic detailing....
Addy101
Well-known
I'm sure it had nothing to do with Leica. The Japanese cameramaker Kuribayashi used a rod dot in the 50's. Red is used a lot in design.
Strelnikoff
Member
AFAIK Agfa started the whole red dot thing in 1968 with the Agfa Optima Sensor http://http://lippisches-kameramuseum.de/Agfa/Agfa_Optima_200_Sensor.htm
I am pretty sure they cam up with it before Leica did.
I am pretty sure they cam up with it before Leica did.
btgc
Veteran
Later there were also green shutter buttons on some Ricoh P&S. Samsung under Rollei name made some compacts with green dot on shutter release. Greeen wooorld.
willie_901
Veteran
I'm an insensitive clod.
I never associated red trim or accents of any sort on any camera with Leica.
I never associated red trim or accents of any sort on any camera with Leica.
KoNickon
Nick Merritt
Didn't the various versions of the Minox 35 also have a orange shutter release (contrasting with the black body)? While to be sure, Minox was then (I believe) affiliated with Leica, I'd chalk this up to general styling cues, as others have suggested.
Bille
Well-known
Sparrow
Veteran
... speaking as a fairly successful designer I can confidently assert that we normally move as a herd, and never, ever, borrow or steal these things but we are sometimes influenced or inspired by them ... the trick is to be at the front of the herd when one is inspired
Jack Conrad
Well-known
When did Leica first start using the red dot logo?
Bille
Well-known
jbielikowski
Jan Bielikowski
Well, they have a red dot... on the flag.
NickTrop
Veteran
Nah -- the red dot has nothing to do with Leica. Not even a little... (Cough -- wrong...)
NickTrop
Veteran
6. Leica Has Nothing to Do With It You Moron!
Take a look at the Japanese flag. Good. Now look at the camera. Now look at the flag. Back to the camera...
Yes -- please read full posts before commenting. The management.
TXForester
Well-known
I would go with 6 if I were betting. I prefer 1 through 5 as they are more fun to talk about than political conspiracies. 
farlymac
PF McFarland
Kodak was using the red dot logo back in the early forties, like on the Pony 135 line of 35mm cameras.
PF
PF