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

[Bill Satterfield <cwsat@cyberhighway.net>]

Why pay this much forn that is obviosly flawe?  Haste makes waste- old LUG
proverb!

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
> >
> >
> >