Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/10/05
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]At 07:33 PM 10/5/2000 -0400, Dante A Stella wrote: >I will rephrase these questions into a format that is more pointed. And yes, I will see >if I can locate a copy of Osterloh's book, although I am not sure it will answer any of >these questions. Mr. Small may be able to shed some light on this, especially the >development of the III vs the M3 and Zeiss's theories... Hmm. I understand that effective base-line IS a real factor. That is, a real base-line of 10cm magnified at a power of 1.5X should be APPROXIMATELY equal to a real base-line of 15cm. Certainly, Leitz felt so in their design of the later LTM cameras, with their magnified RF's. I have always found the IIIc and later RF easier to use than the later M's due to this. It is more accurate in practice. But, of course, the LONG baselines on some of these cameras is quite interesting. The Kodak Ektra had a real base-line of 105mm, and the early Contax I's had an effective base-line of 92.7mm. By comparison, the later LTM cameras only had an effective base-line of 57mm. Marc Marc msmall@roanoke.infi.net FAX: +540/343-7315 Cha robh bas fir gun ghras fir!