PhotoBanter.com - View Single Post

**Thor Lancelot Simon** · February 22nd 11, 09:09 PM posted to rec.photo.equipment.large-format

In article ,
wrote:

I suppose seeing the linhof brand on a shutter could help "prove" it's a
good sample but given the age and unknown history, it's not a fact cut
in stone anymore.

Right. At one point in the mid-90s, the Linhof factory rep for the
U.S. used to very loudly hold forth here about the special Rodenstock
testing machine Linhof had acquired for this purpose, etc. etc. -- but
then again, he was also the Rodenstock factory rep.

He didn't typically respond to questions about what might be wrong with
Rodenstock's own quality control such that Linhof felt they needed to
repeat it! (Of course, this was a little unfair, since Linhof did not
relabel *only* Rodenstock lenses... but it was fun to yank the guy's
chain.)

I suspect Linhof was badly burned by questionable lenses at some point
and decided on this testing program to reduce warranty costs or brand
image problems. That would imply that after some point, Linhof-marked
lenses were particularly good, while before that time, they may well
have been particularly bad.

Since for Linhof's main competitor, there were always both budget
(Wollensak) and premium (Kodak) lenses available, someone having an
awful experience with a Raptar was not likely to abandon the Graphic
or Graflex cameras entirely. But if Linhof was getting all or most
of their lenses from Schneider at some point and Schneider was churning
out Xenars of poor quality -- which seems to have been the case! -- then
they would need some way to escape the damage this could do their brand.

--
Thor Lancelot Simon

"We cannot usually in social life pursue a single value or a single moral
aim, untroubled by the need to compromise with others." - H.L.A. Hart