Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/05/17
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]It probably makes no difference, performance wise. On the other hand being hand made implies that someone in the factory should have held the lens in their hands and noticed these things, just as you did. Dan C. At 03:35 PM 17-05-00 +0100, Simon Lamb wrote: >Hi > >I need an urgent response to this or I may miss the opportunity to get the >lens. I looked at a new 90mm f/2 APO ASPH today and noticed two things. At >the side of the top curved element there was a small bit of white substance >trapped between the lens and the inside screw thread. It was very small and >when I tried to brush it away there was a very fine and small hair attached. >The item seemed trapped and would not move and was, as I said very small. > >There was also a small mark on one of the internal elements. I have seen >this on other lenses and they work fine. > >My question. I did not take the lens because I figured for my £1,200 pounds >I should get a lens without any marks or trapped bits. Am I being overly >fussy and do you feel that this is within acceptable limits of acceptance >considering it is a Leica (hand made) and therefore subject to some >imperfections? > >I need a quick response before they sell the lens to someone else. I have >already waited four weeks for it and, having held it gently in my arms, I >want it back! > >Simon > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Jason Hall" <JASON@jbhall.freeserve.co.uk> >To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> >Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2000 1:00 PM >Subject: [Leica] Leicaflex SL MOT > > >> >> Following earlier posts about SL MOT >> production numbers, I had the following reply >> from Leica UK to an email I directed at >> Solms:- >> >> XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX >> "The s/n 1278xxx was allocated to a batch of >> Leicaflex SL's in 1970. As was often the >> practice this number (not being used in that >> batch) would have been carried over to be >> used in a later production run, i.e. - >> Leicaflex SL MOT. We have no details of any >> prototypes, and modification to the original >> SL is unlikely". >> XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX >> >> I followed this up with a phone call and >> their rep claimed that despite the fact that >> some of the serial numbers fell outside of >> the designated batches, there were, as far as >> he was aware only 980 SL MOT''s made, >> production was limited to 72-74, he also said >> that there were probably far less than 980 SL >> specific motor drives made. Contrary to the >> above mail he said that some of the MOT's >> outside of the designated serial number >> runs may have been modified SL's. >> >> This doesn't really clarify anything, but I >> hope its of interest. >> >> Jason >> >> >> > > >