[Leica] Re: (Thambar) Mary to Dan

["Dan Post" <dwpost@email.msn.com>]

Mary Grace:
Thanks for the info.... I was hoping to use it with a Summar, but since the
diameter of this lens is smaller, a proportionately smaller dot would be
nesessary- perchance, do you know the diameter of the Thambar objective?
Were all the Hektors pretty much uncorrected for spherical aberration? I
sold my Hektor 135/4,5 and kept the Elmar 135/4 because I thought the extra
bit of speed was the way to go and that the Elmar would be a better all
around lens- didn't think that the Hektor might be better for portraits!
Dan
- -----Original Message-----
From: MGMcGough@aol.com <MGMcGough@aol.com>
To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Cc: dwpost@email.msn.com <dwpost@email.msn.com>
Date: Monday, May 31, 1999 6:43 PM
Subject: (Thambar) Mary to Dan


> Dan m'boy - the spot is exactly 1/2" (12.5mm) in diameter, silver on one
> side & black* on the other --- but if not used on the Thambar, it has to
be
> glued to a clear or UV filter & then used with a large diameter lens of
the
> uncorrected spherical aberration type like the 125/2.5 Hektor - it is just
> not effective on most other lenses of smaller diameter & the f: stop has
> to be recomputed proportionally to the effective fl/dia ratio.
>
> Mary Grace
>========================================================
>> YIKES! I was simply considering a simple miniscus lens, as an example.
Now
>>  my 'Leetle gray cells' are totally discombobulated!
>>  I actually am thinkingg of taking my old 1937 Elmar 90/4 and using the
UV
>>  filter, putting a dot, proportinal to the area covered by the Thambar,
and
>>  shooting that wide open....see what happens, maybe serendipity!  Anybody
>>  familiar with the diameter or both the front element of the Thambar, and
>the
>>  spot on the filter?
>>  Dan ( having more fun than I really should have!)
>>