Thank GOD I am not a leica user.....

gandolfi

Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2005
Messages
1,820
Location
Denmark
Format
Large Format Pan
..otherwise I would have to consider this.... (after a win in a lottery that is..) :munch:

Dead Link Removed
 

flatulent1

Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2008
Messages
1,505
Location
Seattle USA
Format
Multi Format
Estimated 50-75k EUR... Not terribly extravagant for a 90mm f/1 ...
 

Old-N-Feeble

Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2012
Messages
6,805
Location
South Texas
Format
Multi Format
Since WHEN has the US NAVY ever needed to qualify/quantify its "wants"? Since WHEN did the US Navy EVER need to "justify" them? ALWAYS!! BUT... since WHEN did US citizens ever DEMAND that??
 

Old-N-Feeble

Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2012
Messages
6,805
Location
South Texas
Format
Multi Format
Since WHEN has the US NAVY ever needed to qualify/quantify its "wants"? Since WHEN did the US Navy EVER need to "justify" them? ALWAYS!! BUT... since WHEN did US citizens ever DEMAND that??

A gazilion dollars for a lens? So what? The American tax-payers are buying it and they won't bitch about it... or at least.. there will be no significant repercussions.........

ETA: "Wide-Open" is in reference to American tax-payer orifices.
 

EASmithV

Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2008
Messages
1,984
Location
Virginia
Format
Large Format
It doesn't look like you can even focus, it's girth covers the rangefinder patch window
 

Mark_S

Subscriber
Joined
Oct 20, 2004
Messages
563
Location
Portland, OR
Format
4x5 Format
I recently went to a presentation by Canon talking about their new EOSC300 camera. This is a new camera (both still and moving picture, digital, handheld), the camera itself is $16K, and they have made lens selection easy by making all of the zoom lenses at the same price - $45K each. This is for a piece of glass with no collector value, no cult status, just a lens.

A unique, collector type cult lens should be worth much more!
 

MDR

Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2006
Messages
1,402
Location
Austria
Format
Multi Format
Kinda defies the whole Leica stealth and portability thing. The lens probably weights three times as much as the camera.

Emil/Gandolfi if you're really interested in acquiring such lenses there are some super high speed X-ray lenses that probably can adaptes to Leica mount and cost a lot less.
It might only be a 65mm lens but it also only costs 290 Euros http://www.leicashop.com/vintage/oude-delft-6510-rayxar-p-5482.html. Or a 90mm lens for a mere 499 $ on the bay http://www.ebay.com/itm/Rayxar-OUDE...-Optical-Ocular-X-Ray-Lens-Unit-/200746172451. Thom A from the Rangefinderforum has adapted a Leitz 1.0/90 X-Ray lens for a picker to m mount the lens goes for about 800 $ on ebay. 75 000 is probably the Leicashop/Westlicht Bonus.

Benjiboy they probably need the lens for surveillance of Radar screens or a General's wife.

Dominik
 

pstake

Subscriber
Joined
May 5, 2005
Messages
728
Format
Multi Format
Who among us has the courage to actually use a lens that costs $50 / $75k?

I'd be so nervous that camera shake would be a real problem.

Then again, at F1, I'd have some fast shutter speeds available, so...

Sure is purdy, though.
 

cliveh

Subscriber
Joined
Oct 9, 2010
Messages
7,524
Format
35mm RF
I'm a Leica user, but even if I won the lottery I would have no need of a lens like that.
 

lxdude

Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2009
Messages
7,094
Location
Redlands, So
Format
Multi Format

Sirius Glass

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 18, 2007
Messages
50,364
Location
Southern California
Format
Multi Format
Can one see though the view finder?
Will the range finder work?
Is there a separate view finder?








I will stick with Hasselblad!
 

TheFlyingCamera

Membership Council
Advertiser
Joined
May 24, 2005
Messages
11,546
Location
Washington DC
Format
Multi Format
The Navy would have used it for aerial surveillance most likely - no focusing required, it would have always been shot at infinity. It would have been mounted to a fixed position aimed out a window. Probably also used for night-time surveillance. And compared to the optics used to photograph high resolution terrestrial images from space, that lens would probably have been cheap.
 

TheFlyingCamera

Membership Council
Advertiser
Joined
May 24, 2005
Messages
11,546
Location
Washington DC
Format
Multi Format
The Navy would have used it for aerial surveillance most likely - no focusing required, it would have always been shot at infinity. It would have been mounted to a fixed position aimed out a window. Probably also used for night-time surveillance. And compared to the optics used to photograph high resolution terrestrial images from space, that lens would probably have been cheap.
 

semi-ambivalent

Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2011
Messages
733
Format
35mm

Cheap for a branch of government that I watched push perfectly good helicopters into the ocean to save deck space. The military probably taught budgeting to the NSA.
 

Moopheus

Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2006
Messages
1,219
Location
Cambridge MA
Format
Medium Format
semi-ambivalent said:
Cheap for a branch of government that I watched push perfectly good helicopters into the ocean to save deck space. The military probably taught budgeting to the NSA.
Click to expand...

It should be noted that this is an auction price for a lens being sold as "collectible" 40+ years after original manufacture and purchase. This price very likely has no relation at all to the price paid by the navy.
 

Old-N-Feeble

Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2012
Messages
6,805
Location
South Texas
Format
Multi Format
I know darned well the US govt paid W-A-Y too much for such a specialty item... they always do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…