Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/05/18

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] 90mm f/2 APO ASPH
From: "Simon Lamb" <s_lamb@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 13:10:43 +0100
References: <CEDC7C9EC8D3D211ACD300805F19DC065CA090@CCEXCH02>

Ken

No.  I sent the cards to Leica UK and got my passports.  All my equipment is
covered for two years in case of damage or defect, accidental or otherwise.

Simon

- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Lee, Ken" <ken.lee@hbc.com>
To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2000 1:04 PM
Subject: RE: [Leica] 90mm f/2 APO ASPH


>
> Simon,
>
> Doesn't that only apply to the US?
>
> Ken
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Simon Lamb [SMTP:s_lamb@compuserve.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2000 10:43 AM
> > To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> > Subject: Re: [Leica] 90mm f/2 APO ASPH
> >
> > It is a piece of white card that has the serial number and description
of
> > the lens.  You send it to Leica and get a passport back.  If it is not
> > there
> > then it may well be secondhand.
> >
> > Simon
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Javad Fatemi" <jfatemi@gfigmbh.de>
> > To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
> > Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2000 10:01 AM
> > Subject: RE: [Leica] 90mm f/2 APO ASPH
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Simon,
> > >
> > > I did not see such a passport, sorry, but I'm very new to this area.
How
> > > does it look?
> > >
> > >
> > > Regards
> > >
> > > *****************************************
> > > Javad Fatemi
> > > GFI Fax & Voice GmbH
> > > Technical Department
> > > Email: jfatemi@gfigmbh.de
> > > Internet: http://www.gfifax.de
> > > Tel: +49-40-3068100
> > > Fax: +49-40-306810-10
> > > *****************************************
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Simon Lamb [mailto:s_lamb@compuserve.com]
> > > Sent: Thu, May 18, 2000 10:05 AM
> > > To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> > > Subject: Re: [Leica] 90mm f/2 APO ASPH
> > >
> > >
> > > Javad
> > >
> > > I would assume that if it were secondhand there would be no passport
> > > papers
> > > inside the box as the original owner would most likely have sent them
> > > off.
> > >
> > > Simon
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Javad Fatemi" <jfatemi@gfigmbh.de>
> > > To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
> > > Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2000 8:24 AM
> > > Subject: RE: [Leica] 90mm f/2 APO ASPH
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > I bought yesterday APO R-Elmarit 2.8/180 and I noticed the same very
> > > > small white thing. I don't thing that it it was for example a second
> > > > hand lens. I  took that, because I wanted it. For me is important to
> > > > find this out, second hand or no. Any idea if there is a way...
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > >
> > > > *****************************************
> > > > Javad Fatemi
> > > > GFI Fax & Voice GmbH
> > > > Technical Department
> > > > Email: jfatemi@gfigmbh.de
> > > > Internet: http://www.gfifax.de
> > > > Tel: +49-40-3068100
> > > > Fax: +49-40-306810-10
> > > > *****************************************
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Dan Cardish [mailto:dcardish@microtec.net]
> > > > Sent: Wed, May 17, 2000 4:04 PM
> > > > To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> > > > Subject: Re: [Leica] 90mm f/2 APO ASPH
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > 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
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >

In reply to: Message from "Lee, Ken" <ken.lee@hbc.com> (RE: [Leica] 90mm f/2 APO ASPH)