Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/06/06
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]This reminds me of a slide show a fellow student put on back in the '50s. When I expressed amazement at the quality of the slides taken with an Argus C3, he explained that he had a friend at the Argus factory who selected a good specimen for him. Made me wonder if the difference between a prime lens and a "consumer" lens is the percentage of the specimens that the manufacturer is willing to junk. Herb > >Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 08:50:41 +0100 >From: David Prakel <dgp@btconnect.com> >Subject: Lens tolerances was RE: [Leica] 35mm R Lens recommendation >Message-ID: <B7439F2A.6CB%dgp@btconnect.com> >References: > >on 5/6/2001 7:48 pm, David Rodgers at >owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us wrote: > >>>> In a nutshell, the 35/1.4 - R is the best 35 lens I have used, including >> the 35/1.4-M asph. But perhaps I was just lucky with the one I got.<< >> >> This brings up an interesting point regarding sample variations. Years ago I >> had 3 Nikkor 28/2.8 AIS lenses. One was noticably superior to the other two; >> so much so that I could pick out photographs I made with that lens. > >Flashback to the 60s. There was a good deal of laughter in the camera shop >when my father took home their entire stock of new Nikkor 50mm f2s to test >and select the one he would keep. There wasn't much laughter when they saw >the results of the best of the bunch! I learned an important lesson. > > - -- Herbert Kanner kanner@acm.org 650-326-8204