I had a long-a$$ reply here, but you're right - let's not bother. You seem to be stuck on some ideas that are axiomatic to you, but are factually incorrect. Your defective Chinese Mac is just as Chinese (and definitely non-western) as any other 'good' Mac, as it the same for virtually every computer, phone or other consumer electronics product on the planet. The notion that Asian origins is somehow an indicator of poor manufacturing quality is a misconception that's surprisingly stubborn. The world of consumer electronics has been dominated for about 3 decades by South Korea, China, Thailand, the Philippines, Malaysia, Taiwan and Vietnam to name a few, and more recently by other BRICs. They make a lot of $1 trinkets of horrible quality, as well as the newest iPhone that withstands years of daily abuse in the hands of a Western teenager.But where are you going with this discussion? Defective parts from factories is fact.
… in a very large factory (DeHavilland) …
Yes, the DeHavilland link is nice. How it somehow relates to today's realities of electronics supply chains or QA practices in that industry eludes me, though. There's practically no relation.
I'll desist koraks. My 17" screen was one of hundreds, possibly thousands that developed that defect, and among the blogs I read, there was one poster who was brave enough to strip his computer down and he explained that how he got it working was to get the LCD's contacts to make better contact with their mating parts.it doesn't matter a hoot where a camera was originally made in terms of the complexity and success rate in performing repairs. And the thought that there's somehow a significant supply of factory-reject defective assemblies sold as spares is as random (and as false) as the idea that your Mac's LCD died because there's dirt on a connector as a result of the Chinese supposedly being unable to run a tidy shop (it would have been kind of funny if not for the undertone of this misconception, which is a much uglier than a broken computer screen).
"I believe they needed cleaning", and the factory did a poor job, and it seems they did do a poor job, they became seriously defective way before the end of an anticipated lifespan of such a product. Faulty parts and products from China and Asia is a commonly known fact.
So my advice: when you have settled on a model, start buying a large amount of bodies which work of it and relax and enjoy shooting with it. I did and I'm a happy man.
View attachment 394034
I'm happy because they all work after some time spent with them. And for me, repairing is fun, so I'm a doubly happy man.
Is this all the same durability and good electronic work for the 80ies Canon T90 bodies too? The japanese called it "the tank" for a good reason I presume.
View attachment 394034
I'm happy because they all work after some time spent with them. And for me, repairing is fun, so I'm a doubly happy man.
Minolta X700: Lots of work to restore a rather cheaply-made camera.
True, but it is not cheaply made, but smart
Minolta X-700: A renovation project
As announced, the first project in the new year will be the renovation of an X-700 with obvious moisture damage. Today the cheaply purchased and well used X-700 arrived and I did an initial inspection. The goal is not to get the camera back to full function at all costs, but to see what damage...www.photrio.com
Compared to Nikon F3, I stand by my statement: I'd rather see solid-tantalum SMD capacitors than the consumer-grade epoxy-dipped and aluminum electrolytic capacitors used by Minolta.
These are two different camera classes, even though they were the respective top models.
While the F3 has the advantage in robustness, the 700 counters with electronic finesse, such as the MPS system. In this respect, it beats the Nikon.
Film-camera tech features are not a high priority for me in 2025, because they tend to look very dated when compared to more modern digital cameras.
Nikon F4: Loved it "back in the day", but always felt it's autofocus was kind of primitive, and today, feel like it's reliance on AA batteries makes it awkwardly large and heavy.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?