Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/07/30
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Erwin, According to Dr. Kingslake one could view the Tessar as a modification of the Protar which was a modification of other previous designs. Yes, there is genius to this. Each engineer used his brain to improve on the original lens. Japan did copy and later improved many lenses. What is wrong with saying this? Yes we could relate many lenses back to the Planar, Tessar, or even relate modern lenses used in microscopes back to the Petzval of 1840, so what. With all due respect, I think you may be reading too much into the posting. Peter K - -----Original Message----- From: Erwin Puts [mailto:imxputs@knoware.nl] Sent: Friday, July 30, 1999 1:39 PM To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us Subject: [Leica] lens design and historical evolution <edited> I think it most unfair to address this topic as a simple borrowing and reworking of an older design. The same story goes for the Double Gauss or Planar design. Almost every (near) symmetrical lens with six lenses in three groups can be called a Planar design. ... The original post seems to shed a false light on the working practise of thousands of optical engineers since 1900 and Marc is right to correct this new myth that is getting space on the Lug. Erwin