Re: [Leica] Did Kodak at one time beat Leica in terms of lens quality???

["Barney Quinn, Jr." <barney@ncep.noaa.gov>]

rei,

I am no expert in this (or any other, for that matter) area. I do have a
medallist. Mostly it lives in my camera closet. It's a brick. A lot of
guys, if I remember properly, used it to cover WW II. This camera is
capable of producing wonderful results. Newer cameras are easier to use,
and may have faster lenses, but his old classic, IMHO, can still deliver
the mail.

Barney

Rei Shinozuka wrote:
> 
> from where we stand in the 21st century it's hard to believe that
> kodak once made serious professional cameras and lenses.  the original
> hasselblad (1600) was equipped with a 80mm kodak ektar 2.8 and the
> 135mm ektar 3.5 was also offered.
> 
> i am curious as to whether people use any of the kodak stuff, the retinas
> or medallists, or whatever.  it would be kind of fun to own a collector
> camera made right here in the U S of A.
> 
> -rei
> 
> > From: "Wang, Albert" <Albert.Wang@ibx.com>
> >
> > So guys, what do you think about the relative comparison between the
> > Americans' ability vs. the German's ability to produce the highest quality
> > optical lens during the 1940's? I am not technically proficient so I can't
> > comment about lens tests this guy claims to have performed. Is it believable
> > that Kodak could have done a much better optical job than Leica did?