Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/01/12
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]That's what I read somewhere too. For some reason, Leitz was late in introducing this lens and realized in Marketing point of view that it was better to stop making the lens. Best Wishes, David - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Marc James Small" <msmall@roanoke.infi.net> To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2002 9:31 AM Subject: Re: [Leica] 180/2.8 Tele-Elmarit > At 12:43 AM 1/12/02 -0700, Greg J. Lorenzo wrote: > >Apparently as far as "optical performance" goes this lens is a absolute > >dud, quickly dropped by Leitz shortly after it's introduction. Suggest > >you look it up in Erwin Puts Lens Compendium. > > > > I did look it up, and that isn't exactly what Erwin said. Lens quality was > undoubtedly of some concern to Leitz, but it may be important to realize > that the 2.8/180 was introduced at a time when Leitz was contemplating > dropping the Visoflex system entirely in favor of the Leicaflex line and > when Zeiss had just announced its 2.8/180 Sonnar (the later, West German > lens, not the "real" Olympia Sonnar), a magnificent design which exploded > earlier views of the limits of moderate long-focus lenses. Thus, Leitz > both axed the 2.8/180 but also killed off in its infancy the other avenue > being explored, the Canadian 3.4/180 direct-mount "goggle" lens. So, it > was less any perceived inadequacy in the Tele-Elmarit's optical qualities > than the overwhelming superiority of the main rival's offering which caused > Leitz to back off. > > Marc > > > > msmall@roanoke.infi.net FAX: +540/343-7315 > Cha robh bąs fir gun ghrąs fir! > > -- > 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