[Leica] Facts revisited

[imxputs@ision.nl]

I am always surprised that anyone on this list can make statements without any 
proof or with reference to that famous " highly knowledgeable and offiial, but 
anonymous sources" phrase, without being challenged or asked to substantiate. 
If I make a statement or do a measurement, my person is made suspect, my 
methods are challenged or I am forced, preferably by legal means, to dsclose 
sources by name, rank and position, I have to give quantities checked, any 
individual serial numbers and if I have to to obey to Stephen Gandy's demand I 
am not even qualified to make any statement unless I can proof I am a working 
optical designer with 20 years of practical experience and should have in 
addition an masters degree in mechanical precision engineering before my 
remarks gain a modicum of respectibility. 
Now if these in itself reasonable demands would apply to all members of the 
Lug, it would die instantly. But such is the force of demagogy that rules are 
for anybody but the person who makes the rules.
Now on topic:
The Konica facts have as source the Konica Headquarters Europe, in Germany. I 
spoke to the service people there, who reproduced wordly (from the English 
specification details) that the film register is 28.00mm plus/minus 0.03.
He also noted that it is impossible for any company with engineering quality 
status as Konica or name anyone else, to depart from that figure significantly.
He said that it is possible to match a Konica body to Leica lenses, BUT then 
you need to adjust the Rangefinder mechanism too. It is not enough to change 
the boyonet, if that could be done. 
He admitted that sometimes a user with a Konica body does not have problems 
when using leica lenses but that it not generally the case.
End of discussion.
To resume my remarks.
I know of Hexar RF bodies that depart from the quoted specs. I do not know why 
that happens or whether these bodies have been adjusted individually.
I do know that I do not trust the wellknown visiual inspection method: I shot 
pictures with a Hexar/Leica combo and see no problems. 
I know and again here Stephen Gandy will object, that handheld shooting will 
degrade te optical potential quality of a lens in such a way that no reliable 
conclusions can be based on this experience.
To give figures: based on the formula to be found in any handbook of optics,
that a defocus of 0.2mm will reduce the definition and contrast of a lens in 
the same proportion as handheld shooting can do.
To be precise: if the optimum quality of a lens is 100 lp/mm, then a handheld 
shooting can reduce it to 20 lp/mm with low contrast. A defocus by .2mm will 
also reduce the optimum to 20 lp/mm. This being the case, any test with 
handheld shooting will mask the defocus reduction.

Erwin