PhotoDigital.netPhoto Resources  Photo Gallery
Google
  Web PhotoDigital.net
rec.photo.marketplace Discussion: Re: Unknown Carl Zeiss Jena targeting telescope (for a gun turrent?)

From: Bandicoot (insert_handle_here_at_email.domain.hidden)
Date: Fri Aug 06 2004 - 09:13:16 EDT


"DFS" <ok_at_nospam.com> wrote in message
news:vhaQc.177$Po1.80_at_nwrddc03.gnilink.net...
>
> > Some of those "Eastern (inferior) quality products" are top class: Maybe
> > you should have some concrete knowledge before spewing bs...
> ____________________________________________________
>
> Right, and the Trabant is the equal of BMW or Mercedes.
>
> NONE of the postwar cameras from factories in the east are remotely close
in
> quality to those made by the likes of Leitz, Rollei (F&H), Zeiss
> (Stuttgart) or even Voigtlander.

Mostly though not wholly true for bodies. Total nonsense for lenses.

Guess you've never used (or herad of) the 180mm f2.8 Sonnar, or the 50mm f4
Flektogon. Both of which blow away their Zeiss West rivals. Lots of other
excellent CZJ lenses, but those two particularly shine. I use four
Schneider MF lenses, and the six CZJ lenses I have are wholly in the same
class. Some later E. European lenses are equally excellent - the Hartblei
55mm shift lens is a notable example.

And you seem not to know that F&H preferred many CZJ over ZW/CZO lenses
until they got their own production sorted out.

>
> Innovation in lens design occurred in the West. Much of it was stolen and
> copied (badly) in the east.
>

Nope. Innovation happened on both sides of the curtain, and for a long
while there was more of it in the East, as it happens. This is even more
the case with camera design than with lenses.

Not much theft either: like it or not, most of the pre-war German designs
that 'moved' East after the war were as part of war reparations agreed as
legal by international courts.

> I stand by my comments.

Check your facts then.

Peter