Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/01/14

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Chrome versus black anodized
From: "Owen Wrigley" <owen.wrigley.mya003@undp.org>
Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 21:01:51 +0630

Dear Friends,

  I am a newbie to the LUG, but not to my cameras.

  I have a question that may have been worked to death
previously, but I cannot find the threads.  SO, if it has,
would someone merely direct me to the thread in the
archives, please?

 My question is a simple one:  chrome versus black
anodized?  In this case, the question regards lenses.  Let’s
leave aside the aesthetics question.  Chrome certainly
weighs more, but does it hold up to use any better over
time?  Is there (or Are there) sound reasons, besides either
taste or weight, in choosing one over the other?

  My Summicron 50, purchased in 1977, is so worn that few
numbers on the scales can be read.  Even the “Leitz Wetl…”
fades and the serial number requires a magnifying glass to
read.  (For the life of me, I don’t know why.  It has always
had a Leitz UVa filter over it.)  My thin Tele-Elmarit 90 is
better, but only just.  In both cases, the glass is just
fine.  This may, of course, be the answer to the question.

 Still, I am currently purchasing several new lenses.  I’ve
chosen the 35 Summicron ASPH in chrome, and I’m quite
pleased with it.  The weight is, however, noticeable.  It
makes me wonder whether the additional weight has any
technical "value" over time.

 So, as I proceed with one or two more purchases, I’m
curious if there have been any technically rooted
discussions in the comparison between Chrome versus Black
anodized?  lenses or bodies, for that matter.

Thank you.

Dr. Owen Wrigley
HIV/AIDS Control Program
UNDP/Myanmar
Yangon, Myanmar

owen.wrigley.mya003@undp.org