Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/03/26[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
Well, I'm 6 for 9, which is not that far off, given the difference in sample sizes. 1 really great one that was ultimately replaced by an 85 Nikkor. I think the whole concept of "Horrid Illegal Japanese Thefts" is quite amusing. The Soviets had no more right to German intellectual property than did the Japanese. The only difference is that the Soviets stole both the designs *and* the Zeiss tooling (which apparently was used until it fell apart). The Japanese just read the optical patents and designed around them. Having been able to compare a broad selection of HIJTs (of Zeiss) with HUSSRTs (of Zeiss), I can say that, design for design, ripoff for ripoff that the more expensive HIJTs are worth the money and the peace of mind of not compulsively testing example after example. Dante Marc James Small wrote: > At 07:47 PM 3/26/2001 -0500, Dante A. Stella wrote: > > > >But what could describe the majesty of trying out a bunch, even from "good > >years," seriatim, and getting frustrated because the dies were worn out that > >day, or the barrel's been flexed a little, or someone skipped the shims in > >the RF cam. I know the black ones have a certain cachet, but they are > >generally pretty poor. "Chrome" is better, maybe 56-59 (the years I have had > >in that color have been good). > > Now, this IS odd. I have had perhaps 30 2/85 Jupiter-9's pass through my > hands, and have subjected 20 or so to photographic tests. Three were dogs. > So, 85% seem magnificent, and 15% aren't keepers. The odds are around > 17:3 that any given Jupiter-9 will be a wonderful lens. > > AND a Jupiter-9 should cost less than $100, while those Horrid Illegal > Japanese Thefts will run three times that, in today's market. Why pay > more, for less? > > Marc > > firstname.lastname@example.org FAX: +540/343-7315 > Cha robh bas fir gun ghras fir!