Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/01/11
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I tracked down Van Stelton. I didn't realize that was John at Focal point. On Jan 11, 2007, at 10:49 PM, Leonard Taupier wrote: > Marc, > > I have the 1st version of the 5/40cm Telyt. According to the serial > number it was probably produced in 1952. Except for the haze it is > in very nice shape. It's a pretty heavy chunk of glass. I've had > the lens for 2 months now and am planning to have it cleaned along > with a IIIc and a M3. I also have a 3.5/5cm Elmar and a 3.5/65 > Elmar that have a little fungus and a very little haze that needs > cleaning up. What I need the most is someone good with lenses. The > two bodies are working OK, nothing broken, just time for a CLA. I'm > not familiar with Van Stelton. > > Len > > > On Jan 11, 2007, at 10:23 PM, Marc James Small wrote: > >> At 07:21 PM 1/11/2007, Leonard Taupier wrote: >> >Hi Marc, >> > >> >I have a couple lenses with haze. One is severe, a 400mm f5 >> Telyt. It >> >makes scanned photos low contrast but as soon as I run auto levels, >> >the pictures from it are sharp as a tack, equaling a couple of my >> >expensive Nikon zooms. >> > >> >Wasn't the coating thing a patent issue with Pentax I believe. Nikon >> >payed and Leica wouldn't. >> >> Get the lens overhauled. Long-focus lenses are generally easy to >> disassemble and clean and a bottle of ROR or the like costs a >> pittance. If you cannot do it, Van Stelton or his ilk will meet >> your needs. Why have a lens in your arsenal that is not capable >> of the best service? >> >> Leitz never produced a 5/400mm Telyt. They did produce two >> different versions, however, of a 5/40cm Telyt. Which one do you >> have, the first or the second? Erwin Puts and I have fought over >> the second generation 5/40cm, which I find a really grand lens and >> which he shunts aside in his own analysis. I guess that I have a >> pick of the chix one, and so be it: mine is a magnificent lens in >> my estimation. >> >> Pentax has absolutely nothing to do with the patent issues on >> coatings. in the 1950's Carl Zeiss held the Smakula vacuum- >> coating patent which did not expire until early 1960. Prior to >> that, Leitz had to coat its lenses with drip method which left a >> wet coating. Firms more friendly to Zeiss, such as Schneider, >> Steinheil, and Voigtl?nder and others had enjoyed the use of the >> Smakula patent for years. >> >> Pentax does have something to do with the development of the >> parallel Zeiss T* and Pentax SMC multi-coatings, but that has >> nothing to do with Leitz. >> >> Marc >> >> >> msmall@aya.yale.edu >> Cha robh b?s fir gun ghr?s fir! >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information