Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/08/02
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]At 02:40 AM 8/2/97 -0400, Alf wrote: >During the last 20 years I bought a total of 4 Hasselblads with the Planar >2.8/ 80 because of the superb Hasselblad construction idea, but sold 3 after >some weeks again because of the rather poor optical abilities compared to the >3.5/75 Planar or the 2.8/80 Biometar. Additionally, I tried the Rollei 66 and >sold it. And, I will sell my pesent Hasselblad on the same reason. > >Further, the extraordinary abilities of the Flektogon compared to any other >lens (Distagon included) were published by Will McBride in the 70th already. First, comparing a 3.5/75 Planar (a 'Flex lens) with the 2.8/80 Planar (an SLR lens) is a bit uneven: they really aren't directly comparable. Second, WHICH 3.5/75 Planar do you mean, the five-element or six-element? The Biometar IS a Planar, the Flektogon IS a Distagon. Period. The only distinction is where made. Finally, the reason that Jena lenses are so inexpensive is because they have, traditionally, not been seen as of the same quality as Oberkochen glass. There are thirty years of personal experiences, surveys, and tests which bear this out. Marc Marc James Small Cha Robh Bas Fir, Gun Ghras Fir! FAX: +540/343-7315