Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/05/18
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]The so-called "passport" only applies to Leicas sold in the USA by Leica USA. Nowhere else. Dan C. At 12:47 PM 18-05-00 +0200, Javad Fatemi wrote: >I'll take a look in the package, maybe I can find it. Thanks. > > >Regards > >***************************************** >Javad Fatemi >GFI Fax & Voice GmbH >Technical Department >Email: jfatemi@gfigmbh.de >Internet: http://www.gfifax.de >Tel: +49-40-3068100 >Fax: +49-40-306810-10 >***************************************** > >-----Original Message----- >From: Simon Lamb [mailto:s_lamb@compuserve.com] >Sent: Thu, May 18, 2000 11:48 AM >To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us >Subject: Re: [Leica] 90mm f/2 APO ASPH > > >It is a piece of white card that has the serial number and description >of >the lens. You send it to Leica and get a passport back. If it is not >there >then it may well be secondhand. > >Simon > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Javad Fatemi" <jfatemi@gfigmbh.de> >To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> >Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2000 10:01 AM >Subject: RE: [Leica] 90mm f/2 APO ASPH > > >> >> Simon, >> >> I did not see such a passport, sorry, but I'm very new to this area. >How >> does it look? >> >> >> Regards >> >> ***************************************** >> Javad Fatemi >> GFI Fax & Voice GmbH >> Technical Department >> Email: jfatemi@gfigmbh.de >> Internet: http://www.gfifax.de >> Tel: +49-40-3068100 >> Fax: +49-40-306810-10 >> ***************************************** >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Simon Lamb [mailto:s_lamb@compuserve.com] >> Sent: Thu, May 18, 2000 10:05 AM >> To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us >> Subject: Re: [Leica] 90mm f/2 APO ASPH >> >> >> Javad >> >> I would assume that if it were secondhand there would be no passport >> papers >> inside the box as the original owner would most likely have sent them >> off. >> >> Simon >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Javad Fatemi" <jfatemi@gfigmbh.de> >> To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> >> Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2000 8:24 AM >> Subject: RE: [Leica] 90mm f/2 APO ASPH >> >> >> > >> > I bought yesterday APO R-Elmarit 2.8/180 and I noticed the same very >> > small white thing. I don't thing that it it was for example a second >> > hand lens. I took that, because I wanted it. For me is important to >> > find this out, second hand or no. Any idea if there is a way... >> > >> > >> > Regards >> > >> > ***************************************** >> > Javad Fatemi >> > GFI Fax & Voice GmbH >> > Technical Department >> > Email: jfatemi@gfigmbh.de >> > Internet: http://www.gfifax.de >> > Tel: +49-40-3068100 >> > Fax: +49-40-306810-10 >> > ***************************************** >> > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: Dan Cardish [mailto:dcardish@microtec.net] >> > Sent: Wed, May 17, 2000 4:04 PM >> > To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us >> > Subject: Re: [Leica] 90mm f/2 APO ASPH >> > >> > >> > It probably makes no difference, performance wise. On the other >hand >> > being >> > hand made implies that someone in the factory should have held the >> lens >> > in >> > their hands and noticed these things, just as you did. >> > >> > Dan C. >> > >> > At 03:35 PM 17-05-00 +0100, Simon Lamb wrote: >> > >Hi >> > > >> > >I need an urgent response to this or I may miss the opportunity to >> get >> > the >> > >lens. I looked at a new 90mm f/2 APO ASPH today and noticed two >> > things. At >> > >the side of the top curved element there was a small bit of white >> > substance >> > >trapped between the lens and the inside screw thread. It was very >> > small and >> > >when I tried to brush it away there was a very fine and small hair >> > attached. >> > >The item seemed trapped and would not move and was, as I said very >> > small. >> > > >> > >There was also a small mark on one of the internal elements. I >have >> > seen >> > >this on other lenses and they work fine. >> > > >> > >My question. I did not take the lens because I figured for my >£1,200 >> > pounds >> > >I should get a lens without any marks or trapped bits. Am I being >> > overly >> > >fussy and do you feel that this is within acceptable limits of >> > acceptance >> > >considering it is a Leica (hand made) and therefore subject to some >> > >imperfections? >> > > >> > >I need a quick response before they sell the lens to someone else. >I >> > have >> > >already waited four weeks for it and, having held it gently in my >> arms, >> > I >> > >want it back! >> > > >> > >Simon >> > > >> > >----- Original Message ----- >> > >From: "Jason Hall" <JASON@jbhall.freeserve.co.uk> >> > >To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> >> > >Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2000 1:00 PM >> > >Subject: [Leica] Leicaflex SL MOT >> > > >> > > >> > >> >> > >> Following earlier posts about SL MOT >> > >> production numbers, I had the following reply >> > >> from Leica UK to an email I directed at >> > >> Solms:- >> > >> >> > >> XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX >> > >> "The s/n 1278xxx was allocated to a batch of >> > >> Leicaflex SL's in 1970. As was often the >> > >> practice this number (not being used in that >> > >> batch) would have been carried over to be >> > >> used in a later production run, i.e. - >> > >> Leicaflex SL MOT. We have no details of any >> > >> prototypes, and modification to the original >> > >> SL is unlikely". >> > >> XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX >> > >> >> > >> I followed this up with a phone call and >> > >> their rep claimed that despite the fact that >> > >> some of the serial numbers fell outside of >> > >> the designated batches, there were, as far as >> > >> he was aware only 980 SL MOT''s made, >> > >> production was limited to 72-74, he also said >> > >> that there were probably far less than 980 SL >> > >> specific motor drives made. Contrary to the >> > >> above mail he said that some of the MOT's >> > >> outside of the designated serial number >> > >> runs may have been modified SL's. >> > >> >> > >> This doesn't really clarify anything, but I >> > >> hope its of interest. >> > >> >> > >> Jason >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > > >> > > >> > > > >