[LRflex] Re: Vario elmar F4: 70-210 - questions to trinklers
- From: David Young <telyt@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2005 08:21:15 -0800
Good Mornin' Philippe!
You asked:
>I'm asking the same question as Douglas but for the above cited Leitz
>70/210 F 4 zoom produced Minolta.
>
>Here are some of the questions that have come across:
>
>a) Is the minolta zoom with the same values the same lens as the leitz
>one - optically I mean - the "wrapping" is obviously different
>
>
In theory, they are optically identical... but in reality,the Leitz
versions are usually better. This is because of Leitz/Leica's stricter
quality control. Although these lenses (amongst others) were made in
Japan by Minolta, Leica QC'd 'em in Germany. One lens (sorry, can't
remember which one) had something like a 70% rejection rate. Others
were re-worked by Leica, to bring them up to standards. This re-work was
so extensive that Leica was legally allowed to change the inscription
from "made in Japan" to "made in Germany"! Thus, a really fine example
of a Minolta lens *might* be as good as a Leica one.... the Leica
version is dependably good.
I understand that it was this QC problem that led to the discontinuance
of their technology transfer deal with Minolta.
>b) if so, is it possible to adapt the (cheaper) Minolta zoom to the R?
>
>
Possibly so. But the cost of the Minolta lens, plus the cost of parts
and labour to make the change would equal more than the price of a used
Leica version. (These are around, used, relatively inexpensively.)
>c) if not, what are the differences?
>
>
The differences are in the mount and in the linkages to make the
auto-diaphragm work, as well as the cams.
>d) if not, can the lenses that compose the Minolta zoom be used to
>maintain an ageing Leitz zoom - just in case.
>
>
Most of the parts that would get major wear would be in the diaphragm
linkages... so no. Were a Leitz/Leica version to be damaged, it might
be possible to use some internal parts from the Minolta version. But I
wouldn't count on it.
>Thanks in anticipation for your contributions.
>
>
Sorry to "rain on your parade". ;-(
Cheers!
---
PS: FYI - to qualify as "made in Germany" (or made in just about
anywhere else, for that matter), over 50% of the value of the product
must be done in that country. With Germany's higher labour rates
(especially as compared to Japan in the 1970's) and with extensive
re-working of a lens, you can see how the change from Made in Japan to
Made in Germany would be legal. Weird, but legal!
--
David Young,
Logan Lake, BC
CANADA.
Personal Web-site at: http://www3.telus.net/~telyt
Leica Reflex Forum web-page: http://www3.telus.net/~telyt/lrflex.htm
------
Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
http://www3.telus.net/~telyt/lrflex.htm
Archives are at:
www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
Other related posts:
