At 09:43 AM 2/22/98 -0700, Benedict, Tom wrote:
>PAGODROMA writes:

>I've always been under the impression that mail-order purchases include
>warranties. Mine did. Is this not always the case?

It depends. Some manufacturers include an International Warranty that
excludes warranty service in the US, and a separately packaged version
which includes warranty service for the US. This allows them to
differentially
price the two. Importers like the large NYC mail-order firms will import
the International Warranty version and pass on the price difference to
the customer. Such goods are labelled "gray market" by the industry, the
warranty difference is an attempt by the manufacturer to fight such
unauthorized imports.

As to why the manufacturers believe they're entitled to a higher profit margin
on US sales - beats me!

The good NYC mail-order firms back up gray market goods with an equal store
warranty that pays for any needed repair. Since warranty repairs for camera
gear, at least (where I have the most experience), is often contracted out
by the camera manufacturer anyway, the fact that the store is doing the
contracting
needn't make any difference. For instance, Associated Camera Repair in
Portland
does warranty work for Nikon, Canon, Minolta and other manufacturers. I have
no reason to expect that they'll do better than a repair facility contracted
by a NYC mail-order house *IF* the house is reputable.

It's that last work - reputable - which is important, and which is why B&H
Photo
in NYC is almost universally recommended by any professional or serious
amateur
photographer as the place to buy camera goods.

They also sell scopes and binoculars, but don't specialize in them and may not
carry exactly what you're looking for. If they do, they'll offer a decent
price.
And, unlike some NYC shops, they'll openly tell you the price for "gray
market"
or official US Imported goods so you can choose. Some mail-order companies
simply
advertise a price and when you order, won't necessarily tell you which version
you're getting.

B&H Photo can be found at www.bhphotovideo.com.

All this depends on the manufacturer, as well. As many of you are aware,
owners
of Canon or Nikon gear often revere their chosen system manufacturer with an
enthusiasm that rivals the Christian Right's fondness for the Old Testament.

In these religious wars over who supplies the better camera system, Canon wins
hands-down on one point: they honor their warranty in the US, regardless of
the import history of the gear. Nikon doesn't - if you buy grey-market Nikon
gear, you're dependent on the store warranty (though with B&H, I wouldn't
worry
about it).

There may be scope manufacturers who honor their warranty here in the US
regardless
of import history, too. I suggest a little research is in order for anyone
who
wants to save a little money going this route.

>It sounds like you have already decided that fluorite glass is the way to go.
>I recommend it highly. It's truely amzing the level of detail you can get in
>low light conditions using fluorite lens.

Nitpick: there is no such thing as "fluorite glass". Calcium fluorite is a
crystalline substance unrelated to glass. It shares some characteristics,
i.e. transparency, that make some of its unusual characteristics exploitable
in the design of long focal-length optics.

I doubt the Leica uses calcium fluorite elements. They don't in their camera
telephoto optics. There are other approaches to designing long focal-length
optics that can deliver equivalent results, and Leica uses these in the design
of their camera optics. Using calcium fluorite is, in a sense, "cheating"
- if
you have the capability of growing large calcium fluorite crystals. Canon, a
much more diverse and larger corporation than most other mainstream camera
makers,
developed the first industrial process for doing so, and their large
telephotos
all make use of the technology. I don't know if the process has been
independently
developed by Kowa and the like, or whether Canon has chosen to license the
technology
or to sell blanks to scope manufacturers. I suspect one of the latter two
cases is
right, though, because fluorite elements are offered by a handful of scope
manufacturers
but not by Canon's rivals in the high-end telephoto market. Since a 600/4
goes for
$9,000-$10,000 (Canon/Nikon) or more like $20,000 (Leica) - just a wee bit
higher
than high end scope prices - certainly the motivation is there for camera
companies
to develop the technology! So I suspect Canon is supplying technology or
blanks under
license to scope makers - Canon isn't active in this market - but not to
camera makers.
The fact that Nikon uses ED glass rather than calcium fluorite, while Kowa
uses
calcium fluorite, makes me doubly suspicious given the deep rivalry between
Nikon
and Canon.

APO doesn't equal calcium fluorite technology, I guess that's my point.
Calcium
fluorite is one approach to designing APO lenses. Actually, Leica's more
traditional
approach yields a more nearly perfect APO design, but as I mentioned at
about $20,000
for a 600/4 vs. $9,100 for a Canon which is 99.99% as sharp - to the point
where you
can't actually measure any difference on film. That's why I describe the
calcium
fluorite approach as "cheating" - you can design APO optics with a simpler
optical
design if you have such elements available.


- Don Baccus, Portland OR <dhogaza at pacifier.com>
Nature photos, on-line guides, and other goodies at
http://donb.photo.net