Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/09/16
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]In a message dated 9/15/00 12:08:32 PM Eastern Daylight Time, MEB@goodphotos.com writes: << t would seem to me to Leica's advantage to make LTM as their default mount. Is there any image quality lost when using an LTM version with an adapter as compared to the M mount version of the same lens? By making LTM lenses default (sold with an M adapter standard), Leica might encourage a few budget minded folks to use classic or new C/V LTM bodies instead of buying an M body first, but they would also make their lenses more adaptable and desirable to a broader market without lessening their dedication to their current M clients or costing themselves huge amounts in retooling. If anyone sees a flaw in this logic please point it out. >> Flawless. The problem is that the E. Leitz marketing experts evidently decided in about 1957 (I'm not looking this up!) to encourage sales of M bodies over TM bodies by discontinuing TM lens mount production, along with TM body production, knowing that others, notably Canon, were still producing LTM bodies and lenses. They did not want to encourage cross-pollination then, and it is doubtful whether Leica wants to do so now. Probably the more interesting question is why Konica opted to go with the M mount,starting with a clean sheet of paper. I suspect they wanted to appeal directly to M owners, easy adaptability of LTM to M regardless. Joe Sobel