[rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar

At 09:32 PM 11/15/2006, Carlos Manuel Freaza wrote:

>My answer was and is that Rollei used the two 1938
>lenses to develop the 1939 2.8 prototype, and Rollei
>needed the lenses for the camera series production,
>the 1939 prototype was ready for production and that
>was the reason to buy the lenses on 1939, Rollei
>needed the lenses but due to the war Rollei couldn't
>obtain the tooling to manufacture the camera for the
>market. The 1939 prototype and that Rollei had
>projected to manufacture the prototype for the market
>on 1939 are facts, the 1939 lenses batch bought from
>Zeiss for this camera production is my conclusion,
>and according Prochnow the lens was recomputed to meet
>F&H quality needs and then Prochnow has to do too.-
Dear heavens, Carlos. Synchronize yourself with the economic realities of the later 1930's. F&H was a major customer of Carl Zeiss Jena but was hardly the largest by a long shot: Zeiss Ikon not only was owned by the same Foundation which owned Carl Zeiss Jena but also purchased probably several dozen times or more as many lenses a year as did F&H. Again, the market will respond to that elephant sitting on the table and not to the vagrant tapping on the window for attention. If there was a redesign of the 2.8/8cm Tessar, it was done to meet Zeiss Ikon's needs and not in response to any request from F&H.
Zeiss Ikon by that time was run by Heinz Küppenbender, soon to move up to head the entire Zeiss works, a role he held through 1972, and to head the entire German optical industry during the War years. (Küppenbender shielded a lot of Jews and other "undesireables" as "workers vital to the War Effort": he was slated to be tried by the Nazis until Speer bailed him out. And, as no good deed goes unpunished, he was later tried by the Allies as a Nazi War Criminal, and was acquitted. Israel, having slavered over Schindler, has yet to acknowledge the much larger role Küppenbender played in saving the lives of Jews. All of this is off the subject, of course.)
In other words, Zeiss Ikon had a fair amount of clout with Jena in the later 1930's. F&H had some clout but not a lot, as other camera companies were buying more lenses than they were at that time.
I do not see F&H having the clout to demand a SPECIAL run of 2.8/8cm Tessars to their peculiar specifications, despite the ambiguous language in Prochnow. Much more probable was that Zeiss Ikon demanded a tweaking of the design, and that F&H was then given the opportunity to hop on board. This is made more probable by the "screw you, jack" approach Zeiss often made towards Zeiss Ikon -- they were relatives but not friends, and while Zeiss HAD to acknowledge the priority of Zeiss Ikon orders, they did not have to like it.
The world does not revolve around Braunschweig, pace Prochnow. We all now that it revolves around Jena and Oberkochen (<he grins> pace Jos. Schneider!). Seriously, Carl Zeiss Jena was the main player and Zeiss Ikon was the elephant on the table. F&H could not demand any sort of redesign as Prochnow hints happened. F&H might well have adopted the Ikoflex III lens but that was a Zeiss Ikon request and not a response to some F&H demand.
If you have some evidence that there is a difference between the Ikoflex III lens and that produced for Rollei, let me know. If you are suggesting that Zeiss Ikon humped along on an order from F&H, let me see some proof other than a simple recitation from Prochnow -- and that is MOST unlikely. I know a lot about the pride of Zeiss and Zeiss Ikon, and, had F&H insisted on a separate lens design, Küppenbender certainly would have insisted on a totally different design for the Ikoflex III.
Again, your entire thesis hangs on proving that there are differences between the 2.8/8cm Tessars produced for the Ikoflex III and for F&H. Prove that, and I will concede your point. 

Marc


msmall@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Cha robh bàs fir gun ghràs fir!

---
Rollei List

- Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

- Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org

- Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org

- Online, searchable archives are available at
http://www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list

Other related posts: