View Single Post
  #40  
Old February 23rd 11, 03:14 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Richard Knoppow
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 751
Default Lens Cell Cleaning


"Thor Lancelot Simon" wrote in message
...
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


The curious thing is that Wollensak's prices were no
lower than Kodak's for their "premium" lenses. I think there
was some sort of design blunder made on the design for the
Raptar/Optar lenses used on press cameras and the Enlarging
Raptar lenses, which are also pretty bad. Kodak's Ektar
lenses are uniformly excellent as are the Enlarging Ektars.
Even Ilex lenses, also not cheap by any means were head and
shoulders better than Wollensak. Now, another curiosity is
that the Optar lenses made by Wollensak for the Series-D
Graflex are excellent. A different design even though still
a Tessar. They were offered as an alternative to the Ektar
lenses for these cameras but the price was about the same.
I think Wollensak got the reputation for being cheap
because they made a lot of OEM lenses for cheap cameras. So
did Ilex for that matter.
Wollensak shutters OTOH are excellent and, since they
use all hair-springs, can be rebuilt with new parts.


--
--
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA