[rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- From: "Peter K." <peterk727@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2006 11:56:15 -0800
Carlos,
I think you are mistaken. If you can comment on things, why can't I? I am
not attacking you.
Peter K
On 11/16/06, Carlos Manuel Freaza <cmfreaza@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
BTW Peter, I think it's clear I'm not interested about
to discuss with you, you are dedicated to attack me
from years ago.
Carlos
--- Carlos Manuel Freaza <cmfreaza@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
escribió:
> Yes Peter, you are right and you always have the
> reason. Thank you very much.-
> Carlos
> --- "Peter K." <peterk727@xxxxxxxxx> escribió:
>
> > OK Carlos,
> >
> > You are right Carlos. It can be confusing with all
> > the verbage in these
> > posts. And once again I have confused you. Sorry.
> > Let me do it like this:
> >
> > CARLOS 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."
> >
> > Peter's REPLY to this statement: This, meaning
> your
> > answer to Marc's comment
> > is speculation! You are drawing your own
> conclusions
> > from circumstantial
> > evidence. Since neither you or anyone else,
> > including Prochnow, was not
> > there during that period it is speculation!
> >
> > Now the second part that I wrote was regarding the
> > order of 5K lenses. Marc
> > noted "Why would F&H order 5,000 lenses which
> didn't
> > meet their needs? I
> > doubt that this was the case."
> >
> > PETER's REPLY: The 1930s in Germany were a very
> > depressed period.
> > Unless F&H had a lot of excess capital I find this
> > ordering 5,000 lenses
> > unusual.
> >
> > This (my reply above) is a general statement
> > concerning the time period. I
> > just find ordering that many lenses during that
> time
> > to be expensive unless
> > it was done on a scheduled purchase and delivery
> > basis.
> >
> > ONE LAST NOTE, Carlos wrote: "You can agree or
> > disagree with Prochnow,
> > however his career in Rollei was like cameras
> design
> > engineer from March
> > 1958 to 1994, and his first contract was approved
> by
> > Reinhold Heidecke after
> > a personal interview, Prochnow has several
> > registered D.B.P patents for his
> > invents and designs like camers designer."
> >
> > Peter's Reply - I hold several patents too. But
> that
> > does not make me an
> > expert in the activities of one of my suppliers.
> > Additionally, something
> > that happened 20 years prior to my employment is
> > pure speculation and
> > subject to the tall tale syndrome. This I liken to
> > Prochnow speculating on
> > what Zeiss did 20+ years before he was an
> apprentice
> > in 1958. The stories
> > are subject to change as the years progress.
> >
> > I hope this clears up your confusion.
> >
> > Peter K
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 11/16/06, Carlos Manuel Freaza
> > <cmfreaza@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > Peter, before to write a message, please read
> who
> > > wrote and mentioned the 5,000 lenses for the
> first
> > > time, it's seems you again are not following the
> > > complete thread.-
> > >
> > > All the best
> > > Carlos
> > > --- "Peter K." <peterk727@xxxxxxxxx> escribió:
> > >
> > > > Carlos,
> > > > I think this is more a speculation on your
> part
> > > > rather than a fact. The
> > > > 1930s in Germany were a very depressed period.
> > > > Unless F&H had a lot of
> > > > excess capital I find this ordering 5,000
> lenses
> > > > unusual.
> > > >
> > > > Peter K
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 11/15/06, Carlos Manuel Freaza
> > > > <cmfreaza@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Marc, you wrote: "...I have no explanation
> for
> > the
> > > > > existence of the Prewar 2.8/8cm CZJ Tessars
> --
> > > > > the first Rolleiflex batch was of only 2
> > lenses
> > > > > and was completed on 2 FEB 1938; the other
> > > > > Rolleiflex batches date from the first half
> of
> > > > > 1939...." and now you ask "Why would F&H
> > order
> > > > 5,000
> > > > > lenses which didn't meet their needs?"
> > > > >
> > > > > 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.-
> > > > >
> > > > > All the best
> > > > > Carlos
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --- Marc James Small <
> marcsmall@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > escribió:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Why would F&H order 5,000 lenses which
> > didn't
> > > > > > meet their needs? I doubt that this was
> the
> > > > > > case. My suggestion -- that F&H found the
> > 1936
> > > > > > tweaking of the 1931 design for Zeiss Ikon
> > > > > > acceptable -- makes sense. F&H was a
> > company
>
=== message truncated ===
__________________________________________________
Correo Yahoo!
Espacio para todos tus mensajes, antivirus y antispam ¡gratis!
¡Abrí tu cuenta ya! - http://correo.yahoo.com.ar
---
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
--
Peter K
Ó¿Õ¬
- References:
- [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- From: Carlos Manuel Freaza
- [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- From: Carlos Manuel Freaza
Other related posts:
- » [rollei_list] 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- » [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
BTW Peter, I think it's clear I'm not interested about to discuss with you, you are dedicated to attack me from years ago. Carlos --- Carlos Manuel Freaza <cmfreaza@xxxxxxxxxxxx> escribió: > Yes Peter, you are right and you always have the > reason. Thank you very much.- > Carlos > --- "Peter K." <peterk727@xxxxxxxxx> escribió: > > > OK Carlos, > > > > You are right Carlos. It can be confusing with all > > the verbage in these > > posts. And once again I have confused you. Sorry. > > Let me do it like this: > > > > CARLOS 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." > > > > Peter's REPLY to this statement: This, meaning > your > > answer to Marc's comment > > is speculation! You are drawing your own > conclusions > > from circumstantial > > evidence. Since neither you or anyone else, > > including Prochnow, was not > > there during that period it is speculation! > > > > Now the second part that I wrote was regarding the > > order of 5K lenses. Marc > > noted "Why would F&H order 5,000 lenses which > didn't > > meet their needs? I > > doubt that this was the case." > > > > PETER's REPLY: The 1930s in Germany were a very > > depressed period. > > Unless F&H had a lot of excess capital I find this > > ordering 5,000 lenses > > unusual. > > > > This (my reply above) is a general statement > > concerning the time period. I > > just find ordering that many lenses during that > time > > to be expensive unless > > it was done on a scheduled purchase and delivery > > basis. > > > > ONE LAST NOTE, Carlos wrote: "You can agree or > > disagree with Prochnow, > > however his career in Rollei was like cameras > design > > engineer from March > > 1958 to 1994, and his first contract was approved > by > > Reinhold Heidecke after > > a personal interview, Prochnow has several > > registered D.B.P patents for his > > invents and designs like camers designer." > > > > Peter's Reply - I hold several patents too. But > that > > does not make me an > > expert in the activities of one of my suppliers. > > Additionally, something > > that happened 20 years prior to my employment is > > pure speculation and > > subject to the tall tale syndrome. This I liken to > > Prochnow speculating on > > what Zeiss did 20+ years before he was an > apprentice > > in 1958. The stories > > are subject to change as the years progress. > > > > I hope this clears up your confusion. > > > > Peter K > > > > > > > > > > On 11/16/06, Carlos Manuel Freaza > > <cmfreaza@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > Peter, before to write a message, please read > who > > > wrote and mentioned the 5,000 lenses for the > first > > > time, it's seems you again are not following the > > > complete thread.- > > > > > > All the best > > > Carlos > > > --- "Peter K." <peterk727@xxxxxxxxx> escribió: > > > > > > > Carlos, > > > > I think this is more a speculation on your > part > > > > rather than a fact. The > > > > 1930s in Germany were a very depressed period. > > > > Unless F&H had a lot of > > > > excess capital I find this ordering 5,000 > lenses > > > > unusual. > > > > > > > > Peter K > > > > > > > > > > > > On 11/15/06, Carlos Manuel Freaza > > > > <cmfreaza@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Marc, you wrote: "...I have no explanation > for > > the > > > > > existence of the Prewar 2.8/8cm CZJ Tessars > -- > > > > > the first Rolleiflex batch was of only 2 > > lenses > > > > > and was completed on 2 FEB 1938; the other > > > > > Rolleiflex batches date from the first half > of > > > > > 1939...." and now you ask "Why would F&H > > order > > > > 5,000 > > > > > lenses which didn't meet their needs?" > > > > > > > > > > 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.- > > > > > > > > > > All the best > > > > > Carlos > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- Marc James Small < > marcsmall@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > escribió: > > > > > > > > > > > Why would F&H order 5,000 lenses which > > didn't > > > > > > meet their needs? I doubt that this was > the > > > > > > case. My suggestion -- that F&H found the > > 1936 > > > > > > tweaking of the 1931 design for Zeiss Ikon > > > > > > acceptable -- makes sense. F&H was a > > company > === message truncated === __________________________________________________ Correo Yahoo! Espacio para todos tus mensajes, antivirus y antispam ¡gratis! ¡Abrí tu cuenta ya! - http://correo.yahoo.com.ar --- 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
- [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- From: Carlos Manuel Freaza
- [rollei_list] Re: 2.8 80mm Opton-Tessar
- From: Carlos Manuel Freaza