Re: Retrofocus Whimsey

[Thomas Kachadurian <kach@freeway.net>]

Mark:

The 50mm lens for the Mamiya 6 is just stunning. I made a photograph with
mine this summer.  In the background, in the distance, there is a dune. You
can see the sand blowing off the dune. Hard to believe, but true. 

Perhaps this exceptional performance is because it's the only
non-retrofocus 50mm out there.

Tom

 stallarAt 06:26 PM 11/16/97 -0500, you wrote:
>At 05:29 PM 11/16/97 -0400, Paul Schliesser wrote:
>>This wasn't unusual with extreme wide angles in the early days of SLRs. A 
>>number of camera brands (including the Leicaflex and the Zeiss Contarex) 
>>had a 21mm non-retrofocus lens which required the mirror to be locked up, 
>>and used scale focusing and a separate viewfinder.
>
>
>Well, much as it pains me to admit EVERYTHING invented by Zeiss isn't
>perfect, any retrofocus lens will simply NOT perform to the same standard
>as a REALLY GREAT non-retrofocus lens.  The difference will be minute, but
>it will be there. 
>
>The Zeiss 38mm Biogon used on the Hassie SWC will outperform the 40mm
>Distagon.  Period.  The difference is minor, but it is there, or else, why
>would Hassie continue to manufacture a non-interchangeable lens camera like
>this?
>
>The 4.5/21 Biogon on the Contax RF and Contarex Bullseye has never been
>equalled.  For its focal length, it remains unparalleled today, almost a
>half-century since Bertele produced it.  As Ludwig said, 'as the jet engine
>is to aviation and penicillin is to medicine, thus this lens will be to
>photography'.  There's some chutzpah there, guys, but he was pretty damned
>close to the mark.
>
>The 3.5/15 Distagon/Super-Elmar is a stunning lens.  But the Hologon,
>again, outperforms it by most optical parameters.
>
>You pays your money and you takes your choice.  But, all in all, if you
>want the best, the very, very best, by all optical parameters, you go with
>a non-retrofocus lens.
>
>Marc
>
>
>msmall@roanoke.infi.net  FAX:  +540/343-7315
>Cha robh bas fir gun ghras fir!
>
>
>