Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/01/12
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Marc, You old stickler you! Please reread my original post. I wasn't quoting Erwin or I would have said "I am quoting from Erwin Puts Leica Lens Compendium here" and used quotation marks. I did answer the original poster's question on good reference sources and expressed my own opinion on why I thought Leitz dropped this lens like a hot potato. Regards, Greg Marc James Small wrote: >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