Re: Leica RF Competitors

[Edward Meyers <aghalide@panix.com>]

y

On Tue, 11 Feb 1997, David Young wrote:

> 
> >>
> >This exchange has shown that we are both familiar with Zeiss and Leitz.
> >Let's return to my original question.  Would you please compare the
> >features and design philosophies of Contax and Retina rangefinder cameras
> >with those of Leica cameras?  To get this discussion rolling, Contax
> >cameras have a vertical running focal plane shutter and Retina's a leaf
> >shutter.  What were the reasons for these design choices when horizontal
> >focal plane shutters were fairly standard during that time?  The leaf
> >shutter greatly limited Kodak in its offering of interchangeable lenses,
> >which could have been very profitable accessories.  A more versatile camera
> >could have increased their film sales. 
> >
> >Glen Robinson
> >Glen Robinson
> 
> 
> Glen:
> 
> If I can stick my nose in between you and Marc, I can perhaps shed some
> light on this.
> 
> The Contax used a vertical shutter simply to get around basic Leitz patents.
> I was always told that the Contax shutter was superbly quiet, even quieter
> that Leica's, but that it was not as durable.  Apparently it had some silk
> (?) strings, which were prone to failure.
> 
> As for Kodak's choice of a leaf shutter, I would think it was because of
> cost.  Kodak, after all, only sells cameras so you'll use the film. They are
> not lens makers - and so have little to gain by giving you interchangeable
> lenses.
> 
> If I'm wrong in this, I'm sure *someone* will show me the error of my ways!
> 
> Cheers!
> 
> 
> David Young             |  To every rule 
> Victoria, B.C. CANADA   |  there is an exception...
> youngs@IslandNet.com    |  and vice versa.
> 
> 
As a lens maker, Kodak was the best for view camera lenses in
the 1940s and 1950s. The Ektars are still used by photographers
over others. The Medalist had one of the finest lenses of its
day, the 100mm f/3.5 Ektar, etc. Not only did the Retina have
Schneider lenses but there were many with Rochester-made
Ektars.
It's strange that at the same time Kodak made top-notch
viewcamera lenses, Detroit made top-notch cars. So
what happened? I guess the bean counters got involved and
it was decided to let someone else do it because it wasn't
so cost effective (or something like it).
My 1940s Medalist, converted to take 120 film (of course),
makes superbly sharp images. The rangefinder is extremely
accurate. It's just a clunker to carry around...but sometimes
worth it. Ed Meyers