Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/10/18
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]At 10:20 PM 10/18/01 -0400, Emanuel Löwi wrote: >The Elcan stuff made for Leica M and related use was largely sub-standard. The 50/2 >Elcan M lens is a cheap optic (in terms of construction and optical performance - try >it!) and the KE-7A is less than the equivalent M4. Midland cut corners on the >military stuff. I am fully aware of what other items Elcan made (having owned several >90/1 and 66/2 lenses). But these and the other Elcan lenses are little known and >hardly understood by 99.9% of Leica users and historians, so let us not digress >there. We are all, however, aware of the $300 hammers purchased by the U.S. military. Emanuel Again, you really haven't a clue what you are speaking about. The stuff Midland has made 95% of their money on is the sort of aerial recon and satellite optics which me and thee will NEVER see. It is never surplused. It is never sold in the civilian world. It just is not available for you or I to discuss. You are basing your analysis on the entire output of the factory on a VERY minor bit of its production. Marc msmall@roanoke.infi.net FAX: +540/343-7315 Cha robh bàs fir gun ghràs fir! - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html