Ha ha! Sort of like we ought to buy Korean built Dodge Colt's instead of those foreign Honda's built in Marysville Ohio to help keep the american auto workers employed?
Ciao, Graywolf http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto ----- Original Message ----- From: "Peter Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, July 25, 2003 2:17 AM Subject: Re: Pentax goes to war? > The defense department also procured a lot of Honeywell Pentaxs > at one time to help the US Camera industry. > > At 02:42 PM 7/21/03 -0400, you wrote: > >Well, the US Navy used a lot of Topcon Super Ds at one time. > > > >Ciao, > >Graywolf > >http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto > > > > > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "Keith Whaley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Sent: Monday, July 21, 2003 1:13 PM > >Subject: Re: Pentax goes to war? > > > > > > > > > > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > > > > > What is within the realm of possibility for what camera it might have > >been will depend on the age of the sub and the procurement rules for your > >Navy. It would not have been an MX on a US Navy sub. > > > > > > Why not? > > > > > > >I suspect most camera bodies from the era that these would be from will > > > look small mounted on a periscope. FWIW, Olympus was very big in > > > microscopes and 35mm bodies for use on microscopes. Olympus is probably > > > the most likely candidate. > > > > > > If a Japanese Pentax would not be found aboard a U.S. Navy sub, why > > > would a Japanese Olympus be okay. > > > Something not revealed here. > > > > > > keith whaley > > > > > To grasp the true meaning of socialism, imagine a world where everything is > designed by > the post office, even the sleaze. > O'Rourke, P.J. >
