|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
69.62.145.78
look at this.
Edits: 08/31/12Follow Ups:
d
nt
nt
“Some people never go crazy. What truly horrible lives they must lead"
― Charles Bukowski
Wonder what the Sheik uses it for. Would like to see a picture taken with it. How much does the Hubble lens cost.
Bill
I would have trouble fitting in my new Canon G1 X camera bag. Also, might be a bit cumbersome when traveling.
I wonder why.
There's an article at the link below about the Zeiss lenses Kubrick used in Barry Lyndon.From a Wikipedia article:
"In total there were only 10 lenses made. One was kept by Carl Zeiss, six were sold to NASA, and three were sold to Stanley Kubrick."
Also a video describing the modification of the Mitchell BNC and the use of the Zeiss f 0.7 lens on it.
Edits: 08/31/12 08/31/12
And BARRY LYNDON was truly one of the most beautiful movies ever made.. And NASA owed him a debt of gratitude for '2001' and more....
who is pretty expert at all things kubrick. could be incorrect.
.
The only possible explanation is some sort of nefarious chicanery by the same folks who brought you 9/11.
But to go along with the conspiracy theory theme, a French documentary (aka "Dark Side of the Moon") claims NASA only let Stanley Kubrick use the Zeiss lens because they owed him a favor for helping fake TV footage of the Apollo XI Moon Landing.
If Kubrick had faked it, the first man on the moon would have been Peter Sellers.
Maybe there's another logical reason. Your problem barry is you go right to the conspiracy card first. That's why we look at you as an annoying nut case.
Enophile's right. Take your conspiracy drivel to the Outside. This isn't the place to peddle your crap.
Take it "Outside."
You're house broken, I hope.
;D
rlindsa
we're on to you rlindsa
$2 Mil may start to make more sense if that lens was say 1/20th the current size at 1600 mm f5.6
If so, no bitching from me!
;D
nt
One offs don't count since the single customer will have to pay for all R&D, tooling etc involved.
If it'd be a standard catalogue item the price would drop to less than a tenth.
Still expensive though…
Back in the days of the Mercedes 300SE 6.3 Mercedes was once asked by a customer to fit a manual transmission. They replied that since it would be a one-off the gear box would cost substantially more than the entire car but they'd do it if he coughs up the cash.
I don't think he did in the end.
Very true and applies to all walks of products.
Cost of R&D, fab, tooling and operation / labor cost. All needs to be recooped to break even and then possibly profit. Not to say they didnt make money, Im sure they did. And knew their buyers disposable income.
I wonder how many prototypes had to be made.
You simply have to laugh at some of the rage the public gives the "greedy businesses" at times. Not that offenders dont exist. Just overall most are trying to get by.
There are so few companies that have the luxury of selling products with INSANE profit margins like Apple does. So few get to write the rules as they can.
Now more than ever, we as a country need a better understanding of basic business functions.
"Now more than ever, we as a country need a better understanding of basic business functions."
I agree. I'm always surprised how poorly people understand the economics of running a business. I guess that's because most people aren't involved in that side of the businesses for which they work.
I wish they had a knowledge of macroeconomics even more.
The only Apple product I own is my MacPro computer and when I got this I went onto the Dell site to configure one of their using the exact same components.
My Apple Mac retailed for £1799, the Dell came to well over £2500.
My mother has an Apple laptop which was £750, £100 cheaper than the nearest equivalent Windows machine which used a slightly slower cpu.
Never looked into smart phones because I have zero interest in owning one. I use the cheapest Nokia I could find at £25 including £10 worth of calls.
I also owned a Macbook and still have my IPAD.
Apple makes AMAZING products. Im not in the slightest a Apple hater. Nor do I not feel Apple is owed a tremendous amount of credit for being ahead of the curve in predicting what folks would place value on as far as computers and personal data equipment. And most importantly, they made computer technology easy and reliable to use, for the most part.
All this being said, as someone who builds computers for a living now... Their stuff has some of the, if not THE, highest profit margins of anything of its kind out there. How else does Apple reach its stratospheric net worth. Its no secret, and Apple has been on the defensive of it for some time now.
There are many publications like ifixit tomshardware wired who have done tear downs and cost estimations of their products many times over. Suffice it say, Apple should be given a medal for its success as a business.
Lastly, and really Im not trying to pick a fight here... But I cannot for the life of me fathom how you couldnt find a cheaper windows counter part for any Apple computer product??? Its about the easiest task ever for a computer shopper. Short of adding Mac OS and getting a display that is "almost" as good as theirs (this IMO is the hardest part for Apple competitors) theres nothing in a Mac that cant be had for a PC counter part.
Again, not trying to fight here. But they are as profitable as they are with reason. Keep in mind they make up only about 15% of the computer market as a whole (last I checked... might be off now). With their phones making a huge chunk of their change these days too.
I bow down to their business presence.
Dave
I could have got it cheaper but only if I'd build the computer myself from parts in which I have no interest whatsoever.
I'm not an Apple fanboy, in fact I dislike some of their business practices as much as Microsofts.
I just very much preferred using MacOS to Windows.
Plus when I got burgled (burglarized for our american cousins I think) and they made off with my 12 year old 350MHz Blue&White Mac G3 my insurance replaced it with a 2.66GHz quad-core MacPro and I can't really complain about that!
Yeah one would have to have their head examined to not take that deal. G3 for a quad core Pro LOL... you made off well son ;-)
Hey it just dawned on me when we last spoke. I was asking you about those MC2 amps you use. Well I finally took the plunge on trying some SS gear. Just got a Sansui AU-717 integrated amp that was TOTALLY and I mean totally rebuilt. Every cap, nearly every resistor, new Nichicon Muse PS caps, the works rebuilt. Im hoping I dont regret this. But I just had to try some SS gear. Now just have to find the time to hook this bad boy up.
Again, great trade off for the Mac Pro. Wish all insurance stories had such happy endings :-) Yeah Macs have a nice interface. Personally Im just such an old school windows / builder hobbyist, I dont think I could make the switch. But who knows. In time maybe.
All the best
Dave
...is why people post gripes about how a box of $100 worth of parts is overpriced at $1000.
Or better yet how oh so many spend nearly all their disposable income on clothing or sneakers made in china for $4 that sell for $40-250 here in the states, just so they can impress other dolts who place emphasis on such silliness.
I dont feel so bad for buying my tube amps made of $800 in parts and assembled by talented old men in their 50s+ and sold to myself for $2-3K. But hey thats just me. ;-)
Great, now Im sounding like a bitter old curmudgeon LOL
Dave
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: