Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1996/03/15

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Subject: Re: M35 f/1.4 Aspherical vs M35 f/1.4 Asph
From: Eric Welch <ewelch@gp.magick.net>
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 1996 08:05:52 -0800
Organization: Grants Pass Daily Courier
References: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960314181334.9524A-100000@eskimo.com>

Charles Albertson wrote:
> 
> On 15 Mar 1996, Adrian Tanovic/GRFP/GRN wrote:
> 
> > All right, I'm confused.  What is the difference between the Aspherical and the
> > Asph?  I've seen lenses with both inscriptions on the front, but had thought
> > Leica just shortened the engraving on a subsequent production run.  From
> > postings in this group I get the impression they are actually different
> > lenses.  Eastland, inter alia, only mentions the Aspherical.  If these lenses
> > are indeed different, it would be a masterpiece of confusing marketing.
> >
> problems (for example, I heard that only one person in the factory had
> the requisite skill to polish some of the elements in a particular way),
> they only cranked out half that number. 

Actually, what happened was one of the two that were building it died, 
or retired. Can't remember which. So they put a less experienced guy on 
the line and that is what caused the Q.C. problem. Which I hear was the 
front of the lens would often separate from body of the lens. But that 
wasn't the reason for making only two thousand either. It was because 
there was this run of a special type of glass that Leica ended up with, 
and the batch would only be enough to produce 2,000 copies, which 
sparked the creation of this lens in the first place. So they had to 
redesign with a new type of glass for the regular production line, 
regardless.

> version on the market today (as much as $4500 for the original, versus
> about $2800 for the current version). The redesign involved such
> innovations as a molded plastic element, and I haven't heard of too 

No, it doesn't have a plastic element. It has a single aspherical 
element rather than two of the original. The difference is that it is 
pressed while hot into the aspherical shape, and needs no polishing 
afterwards. That lessens the price significantly. Canon pioneered that 
technique, I believe. But Leica claims that because of a new type of 
glass used in the current version, the performance of the lens is higher 
than the original, slightly. I know I'll own this lens some day. 

-- 
Eric Welch
Grants Pass, OR



Replies: Reply from Gary J Toop <gtoop@uoguelph.ca> (Re: M35 f/1.4 Aspherical vs M35 f/1.4 Asph)
In reply to: Message from Charles Albertson <chucko@eskimo.com> (Re: M35 f/1.4 Aspherical vs M35 f/1.4 Asph)