Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/01/07

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] tele-elmarit
From: "Steve Barbour" <kididdoc@home.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2002 18:15:29 -0700
References: <000501c19733$81977e80$0200a8c0@mediaone.net> <003d01c19792$6782a880$8c5bfea9@dan14dyp3s7zcg> <001901c197ca$ea3c68a0$82120e18@phnx1.az.home.com> <3C3A2D10.95339817@earthlink.net> <025201c197d8$56549b40$82120e18@phnx1.az.home.com> <3C3A420A.3373DE8A@earthlink.net>

Thanks Steve for the insight... do you have any idea whether the later
versions of this lens are better, or less likely to flare...? Steve
- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Stephen Gandy" <leicanikon@earthlink.net>
To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Sent: Monday, January 07, 2002 5:49 PM
Subject: Re: [Leica] tele-elmarit


> not sure about the coatings, Leica generally improves coatings without
> announcing it, but the same glass.
>
> Leica users are often pretty fanatical about Leica, but Leica collectors
> usually take it to the next level and beyond. any cosmetic change is
noticed,
> and can often become a new item to find for their collection.  keeping
track of
> the variations  is made more difficult because Leica seldom announces
cosmetic
> changes.   while lens or body variations usually make no practical
difference
> to shooters, they can make substantial differences in the price
collectors will
> pay for them.   a nice common black 90 TE will probably sell in the
$500-600
> range, while the ultra rare chrome version in identical shape with the
> identical glass may command $3000 or more to a collector who has searched
for
> years trying to find it.
>
> Stephen
>
> Steve Barbour wrote:
>
> > Thanks Steve for the insight... I guess that is the question...?same
glass,
> > coatings, glue etc..why are there multiple variations of the SAME
thing??
> > Steve
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Stephen Gandy" <leicanikon@earthlink.net>
> > To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
> > Sent: Monday, January 07, 2002 4:19 PM
> > Subject: Re: [Leica] tele-elmarit
> >
> > > it depends on your terminology.
> > >
> > > rather than different TE "versions,"  describing them as variations
of
> > the same
> > > version is probably a better description.  so far as I know the thin
TE
> > all
> > > have the same glass.
> > >
> > > Stephen Gandy
> > >
> > > Steve Barbour wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Dan.....One thought that recurs to me concerns  the existence of
> > several
> > > > different  "thin 90 TE's " ,  as you know...summarized at Gandy's
> > > > Cameraquest. Are we speaking of one lens or 4-5 different types of
> > thin 90
> > > > TE's  ?   It would be interesting to survey peoples' opinions with
this
> > > > information considered in the  survey....Steve
> > > >
> > > > > I want to thank everyone for the lively discussion about the 90s!
> > > > > I had a Summicron 90 in chrome--- HEVVY-DOOTY! Sold it, and have
> > since
> > > > been
> > > > > satisfied using a 1932 90/4 Elmar!!! Good portrait lens, but I
would
> > like
> > > > a
> > > > > newer optic at times, and the discussion has helped me make up my
> > mind!
> > > > > I am still amazed at the different opinions about the same lens-
and
> > I
> > > > don't
> > > > > think it is all a matter of differences in QC, as was advanced at
one
> > > > > point... I think the 'Human Factor' which is more widely variable
> > than
> > > > > Leitz' QC is the reason there are so many diverse opinions!
Truly,
> > > > different
> > > > > strokes for different folks!!  :o)
> > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > From: "tlianza" <tlianza@mediaone.net>
> > > > > To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
> > > > > Sent: Sunday, January 06, 2002 11:26 PM
> > > > > Subject: [Leica] tele-elmarit
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > I have a thin tele elmarit and the pre-aspheric 90mm.  I found
that
> > the
> > > > > > perfomance of the tele-elmarit was very close to that of the 90
mm
> > > > > > summicron.  I ran a number of resolution tests and the
resolution
> > of
> > > > both
> > > > > > lenses was  identical at f5.6 and f11. at f2.8 the Summicron
seemed
> > to
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > To unsubscribe, see
http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
> > >
> > > --
> > > To unsubscribe, see
http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
> > >
> >
> > --
> > To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
>

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

Replies: Reply from Marc James Small <msmall@roanoke.infi.net> (Re: [Leica] tele-elmarit)
Reply from Stephen Gandy <leicanikon@earthlink.net> (Re: [Leica] tele-elmarit)
In reply to: Message from "tlianza" <tlianza@mediaone.net> ([Leica] tele-elmarit)
Message from "Dan Post" <dpost@triad.rr.com> (Re: [Leica] tele-elmarit)
Message from "Steve Barbour" <kididdoc@home.com> (Re: [Leica] tele-elmarit)
Message from Stephen Gandy <leicanikon@earthlink.net> (Re: [Leica] tele-elmarit)
Message from "Steve Barbour" <kididdoc@home.com> (Re: [Leica] tele-elmarit)
Message from Stephen Gandy <leicanikon@earthlink.net> (Re: [Leica] tele-elmarit)