Re: [Leica] 90mm f/2 APO ASPH

["Simon Lamb" <s_lamb@compuserve.com>]

Steve

I think you are right.  It's just that if I know the speck is there I will
always wonder if an image might have been different if it were not.  Stupid
I know, but I am old enough now to be allowed some quirks ;-)

Simon

- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve LeHuray" <icommag@toad.net>
To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2000 4:15 PM
Subject: Re: [Leica] 90mm f/2 APO ASPH


>
> Simon,
> Not likely to effect the image at all and you may be able to use that
defect
> to argue the price down.
> Steve
> Annapolis
>
>
>
>
>  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
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
>