Re: Nimslo innocent?

[P3D Gabriel Jacob <jacob@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Sam Smith writes

>It certainly is the only quality stereo 3D camera in the last 30 or so years
>that has attempted to reach the average consumer, and hopefully not the
>last. It wasn't easy to find when I got mine in the mid 80's, and the lenses
>can't be beat. The lesson learned seems to be in getting the public to
>accept the concept, not in reducing the price and/or quality of the product.

Ahhh the "getting the public to accept 3D concept" :-)
Yes your right on regarding NOT reducing the quality of the product but I
believe a quality product can be delivered at a reasonable price. Example,
the Nimslo had decent quality optics for the price and it had 4 "expensive"
lenses. A regular 3D camera would only need 2 of these. Thus this should
reduce the cost somewhat. Another example. The Loreo camera with expensive
paperweight viewer. Without the mirror thingie and useless viewer IMO,
and replacing the optics with Nimslo quality, I think the price can be
kept under $100 easily, if the preceding examples is anything to go by.

Another problem in getting the public to accept it and probably also lead
to the Nimslo's demise is easy availability or lack of in being able to
purchase said camera. You mention you had problems procurring the Nimslo,
I did also. Now the public surely is not going to go out of their way to
get one. You have to shove it down their throats. ;;;;-) 

>Regarding the "disposable camera" concept, it just seems totally against
>everything logical. Not exactly environmentally friendly. Perhaps they will
>have it manufactured by child-slave labor and lubricated with whale oil just
>to be consistent.
>
>IT'S THE END OF THE CENTURY DARNIT, IS THIS THE BEST THE WORLD HAS TO OFFER???

Hmmm "disposable camera". I think the politically correct types and marketing
people like to refer it as a single-use camera. Seriously though I don't 
see a problem with a single-use camera since most of the components surely
must be re-used. So I don't see a single-use camera as comprimising in
quality optical wise. It shouldn't have to be. I have always thought that
putting some descent lenses on a Nishika and it would have been a great
camera. Not the one with the fake features, but the other model.

So in conclusion even though I am usually a pessimist, in this case I
am optimistic that wiser headdds will prevail and a half decent 3D camera
will result. (now I wonder who is gonna introduce one) Long live 3D! ;-)

Happy 3Days (hopefully) are here again!!!

Gabriel
 


------------------------------