PDA

View Full Version : Thank GOD I am not a leica user.....



Pages : [1] 2

gandolfi
04-26-2012, 03:11 PM
..otherwise I would have to consider this.... (after a win in a lottery that is..) :munch:

http://www.liveauctioneers.com/item/11315158_elcan-190mm-ke-7a-sn-164-0001-c1970

flatulent1
04-26-2012, 03:42 PM
Estimated 50-75k EUR... Not terribly extravagant for a 90mm f/1 ...

benjiboy
04-26-2012, 03:45 PM
Why would the U.S Navy need a lens like this ?

Old-N-Feeble
04-26-2012, 03:49 PM
Since WHEN has the US NAVY ever needed to qualify/quantify its "wants"? Since WHEN did the US Navy EVER need to "justify" them? ALWAYS!! BUT... since WHEN did US citizens ever DEMAND that??

Helinophoto
04-26-2012, 03:50 PM
It's probably soft wide open, so you're better off with a modern lens anyway.

:D

Old-N-Feeble
04-26-2012, 03:51 PM
Since WHEN has the US NAVY ever needed to qualify/quantify its "wants"? Since WHEN did the US Navy EVER need to "justify" them? ALWAYS!! BUT... since WHEN did US citizens ever DEMAND that??

A gazilion dollars for a lens? So what? The American tax-payers are buying it and they won't bitch about it... or at least.. there will be no significant repercussions.........

ETA: "Wide-Open" is in reference to American tax-payer orifices.

EASmithV
04-26-2012, 03:54 PM
It doesn't look like you can even focus, it's girth covers the rangefinder patch window

perkeleellinen
04-26-2012, 03:55 PM
High reserve on this also: http://www.liveauctioneers.com/item/11314975_leica-0-series-sn-116-1923

Mark_S
04-26-2012, 04:00 PM
I recently went to a presentation by Canon talking about their new EOSC300 camera. This is a new camera (both still and moving picture, digital, handheld), the camera itself is $16K, and they have made lens selection easy by making all of the zoom lenses at the same price - $45K each. This is for a piece of glass with no collector value, no cult status, just a lens.

A unique, collector type cult lens should be worth much more!

MDR
04-26-2012, 04:01 PM
Kinda defies the whole Leica stealth and portability thing. The lens probably weights three times as much as the camera.

Emil/Gandolfi if you're really interested in acquiring such lenses there are some super high speed X-ray lenses that probably can adaptes to Leica mount and cost a lot less.
It might only be a 65mm lens but it also only costs 290 Euros http://www.leicashop.com/vintage/oude-delft-6510-rayxar-p-5482.html. Or a 90mm lens for a mere 499 $ on the bay http://www.ebay.com/itm/Rayxar-OUDE-DELFT-E90-1-0-90mm-F1-0-Telescope-Optical-Ocular-X-Ray-Lens-Unit-/200746172451. Thom A from the Rangefinderforum has adapted a Leitz 1.0/90 X-Ray lens for a picker to m mount the lens goes for about 800 $ on ebay. 75 000 is probably the Leicashop/Westlicht Bonus.

Benjiboy they probably need the lens for surveillance of Radar screens or a General's wife.

Dominik

pstake
04-26-2012, 04:01 PM
Who among us has the courage to actually use a lens that costs $50 / $75k?

I'd be so nervous that camera shake would be a real problem.

Then again, at F1, I'd have some fast shutter speeds available, so...

Sure is purdy, though.

cliveh
04-26-2012, 04:09 PM
I'm a Leica user, but even if I won the lottery I would have no need of a lens like that.

segedi
04-26-2012, 04:26 PM
This will go perfectly with my NEX-5n. I just need two tickets. Winning Lotto and to Viena.

brucemuir
04-26-2012, 04:41 PM
what is the top shutter speed of an M?
Guess it would be ND time outdoors.

lxdude
04-26-2012, 04:43 PM
ETA: "Wide-Open" is in reference to American tax-payer orifices.

Well, it doesn't look to me like it would be soft.

Old-N-Feeble
04-26-2012, 04:46 PM
Well, it doesn't look to me like it would be soft.

Oh, it's VERY soft. We're Uncle Sam's worn-out bitches for sure.

Sirius Glass
04-26-2012, 04:59 PM
Can one see though the view finder?
Will the range finder work?
Is there a separate view finder?








I will stick with Hasselblad!

IloveTLRs
04-26-2012, 05:44 PM
What, no LTM version?

TheFlyingCamera
04-26-2012, 08:56 PM
The Navy would have used it for aerial surveillance most likely - no focusing required, it would have always been shot at infinity. It would have been mounted to a fixed position aimed out a window. Probably also used for night-time surveillance. And compared to the optics used to photograph high resolution terrestrial images from space, that lens would probably have been cheap.

TheFlyingCamera
04-26-2012, 09:03 PM
The Navy would have used it for aerial surveillance most likely - no focusing required, it would have always been shot at infinity. It would have been mounted to a fixed position aimed out a window. Probably also used for night-time surveillance. And compared to the optics used to photograph high resolution terrestrial images from space, that lens would probably have been cheap.