Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1996/02/01

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

To: Marc James Small <msmall@roanoke.infi.net>
Subject: Re: M lenses with coma???
From: Eric Welch <ewelch@gp.magick.net>
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 1996 00:06:45 -0800
Cc: Sherril & Bill Erfurth <photo-op@ix.netcom.com>, leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Organization: Grants Pass Daily Courier
References: <199601311441.JAA19671@mh004.infi.net>

Marc James Small wrote:
> 
> Max Berek began the design philosophy of retaining some residual aberration

But which aberration? And Max Berek, we're talking 1914-20, or somwhere 
in there. And it's not so much retaining, as the way compromises were 
made. No lens is free of aberrations, none. And every lens is a 
balancing act between aberrations. And a more up-to-date read on Leica 
lens design philosophy (though now a bit out of date due to late changes 
in philosophy for interpreting test results) is "Leica Lens Practice." 
It mentions Leica's philosophy in the last 40 or so years, especially 
the last two decades (since the 180 f/3.4 Apo Telyt came out).

-- 
Eric Welch
Grants Pass, OR

In reply to: Message from msmall@roanoke.infi.net (Marc James Small) (Re: M lenses with coma???)