[Leica] blasphemy

[Summicron1@aol.com]

In a message dated 6/8/98 5:13:23 AM, tom shea wrote:

<<The largest "chunk" of glass in the 35 1.4 not so large at all.  It is

apparent that you have not seen one of these puppies.  It really is not very

large at all.  Go to a dealer and try one.  You may be surprised.

>>
not to mention other abuse about defending summiluxes, fast lenses and who
knows what eles.

thanks tom, nothing like a little abuse to start the week right.

- -- when I say "hunk" of glass I don't mean it weighs a lot. I mean it is very
large relative to the focal length. A 1.4 lens is a LOT bigger than an f-2,
and it is this simple size, the distance of the edge of the lens from the axis
of the lens (a line through its middle from front element to film) that causes
all the trouble.  The bigger the lens elements, the more they have to bend the
light to move it through from object to film. The more you do that, the more
you get the different wave lengths separated (I learned this in High School
Physics) which is why prisms and rainbows work. An f-3.5 lens is relatively
undemanding in this regard, and so it was easy to make them of very high
quality, while the early 1.4 lenses were downright poopy. I seriously dought
that Leitz will be making a 3.5 Asph/APO 50 mm Elmar any time soon because
there would be no point -- the existing 3.5 (or 2.8) Elmar does a fine job as
it is.

- -- An f-2 lens IS fast. It's only one stop slower than the 1.4. Unless you are
going to, very often, be in situations where you need that speed and cannot
compensate by using faster film, I insist it is a luxury you need not pay a
lot of money for.
 



- --I submit that people who buy 1.4 lenses that they don't need are trying to
impress someone -- themselves, if no one else. I say this freely admitting
that I sure as hell hope someone is impressed when they see me with a Leica
around my neck. If the guy who asked the question really really needs the
faster lens, fine, but if he doesn't he should save money.

speaking of saving money -- if anyone with an M-3 out there is considering
buying one of those quick load adaptors that Leitz made for it, send me $15
and I'll send you mine -- it doesn't work worth a damn, but I'll be happy to
sell it to you anyway. I've tried just sliding the film in, crimping the
edges, even pondered gluing the film end to the take-up spool but it refuses
to catch 9 times out of 10.

charlie trentelman
ogden, utah