Re: [Leica] impurities in lens

[Vick Ko <vick.ko@sympatico.ca>]

Is this because the "clean room" at Leitz to assemble the lenses isn't
as "clean" as the rooms in Japan?

Martin Howard wrote:

> Chris Lee jotted down the following:
>
> > I went to a local Leica dealer today where I was looking at many of their
> > lenses. I noticed almost all of the lenses, which were supposed to be brand
> > new, showed some very tiny "impurities" in the glass. These looked like very
> > fine particles suspended inside the glass elements. Although they were only
> > visible at certain angles in very strong lighting, I couldn't help but
> > wonder what they were. Can someone tell me if these lenses are defective? Or
> > these things are supposed to exist in every lens, good or bad?
> >
>
> Yep, you've stumbled upon a little known secret outside Leicadom: their
> lenses are full of crap and impurities.  Actually, the more full of rubbish
> they are, the higher the price they command.  Their lenses are not actually
> ever meant to be placed on a camera and used for photography, and since the
> impurities only show up when light travels through the lens, it has no
> effect on their real, intended use: to be placed in a hermetically sealed,
> climate-controlled, glass collectors case.
>
> So why do we all pay premium prices for Leica glass?  Camera snobbism, of
> course!  A Leica lens dropped 4000ft onto a rock and filled with bubbled,
> muck, grease, cracks, and a still focussing ring ('mint-' on eBay) is still
> worth more than an factory-new, absolutely unblemished equivallent focal
> length lens Nikon or Canon lens.
>
> ;)  (For those of you still in doubt)
>
> M.
>
> --
> Martin Howard                | "Once you understand the process of co-
> Visiting Scholar, CSEL, OSU  | ordination, it's much easier to avoid.
> email: howard.390@osu.edu    | Knowledge is power."  -- K. Christoffersen.
> www: http://mvhoward.i.am/   +--------------------------------------------