Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/02/08
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I find the Visoflex is/was such a complex configuration system with such bazaar names, it must be done on purpose by Leica to eliminate the infidels. I find tracking down the family tree of any individual easier than trying to identify and be definitive on any componentry within the Visoflex system. But then there are those with Doctorate degrees of Leica who are perfectly comfortable with such nomenclature . . . Go figure. - --- Rei Shinozuka <shino@ubspw.com> wrote: > > why did leica make so many different types of > close-up adapter rings > for use with various lenses and the viso II/III? > many of these went between > the M-mount focusing adapter and the lens head. > since the whole point was > to move the optical groups further from the film > plane, why didn't they just > use an M-mount extention tube. isn't that that > 16469 is? > > as a specific example, i direct one's attention to > eastland's m compendium > where on page 179 there is a viso III system map. > the close-up solution > for the telyt f/4 200 is > viso->16466(OUBIO)->14020(close-up adapter)->telyt. > on page 180, there is a viso II system map, which > ought to be similar. > this one shows the close-up solution for the same > telyt f/4 200 as > viso->16469Y(M close-up > adapter)->16466M(OUBIO)->telyt. > the first 14020-based solution does appear to yield > slightly greater > magnification. > > -rei > -- > To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send FREE Valentine eCards with Yahoo! Greetings! http://greetings.yahoo.com - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html