RE: [Leica] Did Kodak at one time beat Leica in terms of lens quality???

["Jeffery Smith" <jsmith45@bellsouth.net>]

I have a Retina, but I think it was made in Germany and marketed here.
If I recall, it has a 50/2.8 Xenar. I don't use it as it is a $40 camera
that needs $300 worth of work to bring it back to good working order
(leather bellows are very expensive these days). It took excellent
snapshots, but I wouldn't compare it to a Leica. None of the lenses
appear to be coated on mine.

Jeffery Smith

- -----Original Message-----
From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
[mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us] On Behalf Of Rei
Shinozuka
Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2001 2:34 PM
To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Subject: Re: [Leica] Did Kodak at one time beat Leica in terms of lens
quality???


from where we stand in the 21st century it's hard to believe that kodak
once made serious professional cameras and lenses.  the original
hasselblad (1600) was equipped with a 80mm kodak ektar 2.8 and the 135mm
ektar 3.5 was also offered.  

i am curious as to whether people use any of the kodak stuff, the
retinas or medallists, or whatever.  it would be kind of fun to own a
collector camera made right here in the U S of A.

- -rei

> From: "Wang, Albert" <Albert.Wang@ibx.com>
> 
> So guys, what do you think about the relative comparison between the 
> Americans' ability vs. the German's ability to produce the highest 
> quality optical lens during the 1940's? I am not technically 
> proficient so I can't comment about lens tests this guy claims to have

> performed. Is it believable that Kodak could have done a much better 
> optical job than Leica did?