Reid LTM Reid III

[L39chap]

Error! Error!

 

[someonenameddavid]

Reid III

Thanks for the cite. Very informative.

So is the T2.2 Amotal 50mm on the Foton the same lens as comes standard on the Reid????

David

 

[furcafe]

My understanding is no, though there may be some similarity in design (perhaps someone has the diagrams). There's a clear difference in appearance, with the lens on the Reid marked as a 2 inch/2 "Taylor-Hobson Anastigmat" & collapsible, whereas the lens on the Foton is a 2 inch/2 "Taylor, Taylor & Hobson Cooke Amotal Anastigmat" & rigid. Having both, I would say the lens on the Reid is a bit better than that on the Foton.

So is the T2.2 Amotal 50mm on the Foton the same lens as comes standard on the Reid????

David

 

[L39chap]

The T&H was the standard lens for the Reid from the beginning. Not quite sure how the other lenses came into the frame.

 

[furcafe]

After the demise of the Bell & Howell Foton system, many of the Cooke Amotals were bought by U.S. Leica dealers to be adapted to LTM & sold with Leica bodies. This was done in order to circumvent existing retail price maintenance rules, i.e., at that time, a Leica dealer could not sell Leica cameras at a discount unless they were packaged with a non-Leitz lens. Fast forward 60+ years, & today, you will occasionally see Reid bodies sold with adapted Cooke Amotals from Fotons rather than the original standard collapsible Anastigmat, causing some confusion.

The T&H was the standard lens for the Reid from the beginning. Not quite sure how the other lenses came into the frame.

 

[L39chap]

Reid III Mk2 sold by Westlicht for €6600. Surely such prices cannot be sustained?

 

[David Hughes]

Sizes etc

Sizes etc

Hi,

How about a British machine shop having all its tools calibrated in inches and the Leica being designed around millimetres? Compare using a lens marked in feet with a range-finder that's marked in metres.

So you do a conversion using maths and the answer runs to 5 or 6 decimal places: or you go for the nearest sensible Imperial size...

Years ago in the 70's I needed a metric micrometer and it took a while to find one. Everyone had them in inches, of course.

Regards, David

 

[someonenameddavid]

I don't have a Leica IIIb, but compared to the IIIc & IIIg, the Reid III is certainly as well-built if not better. IIRC, in my discussions w/Don Goldberg ("DAG"), who got 1 of mine into working condition, he said that many, if not most, of the Reid & Sigrist parts are not interchangeable w/Leica because they are smaller & made to tighter tolerances.

As far as the Taylor-Hobson 2"/2 Anastigmat, I would mostly agree w/Mr. Hicks that it's comparable to the collapsible Summicron, but more flare-resistant (in my experience, anyway) perhaps because of better coatings. I've never used a Summitar, so have no basis for comparison there.

How would you compare the TTH Anastigmat on the Reid to the Amotal on the B+H Foton ?


David

 

[furcafe]

The Anastigmat seems to be a bit better (sharper wide-open).

How would you compare the TTH Anastigmat on the Reid to the Amotal on the B+H Foton ?


David

 

[Roger Hicks]

I was only reading about the Reid cameras last night, These cameras were built to imperial measurements and not metric.

Not entirely, e.g. the 39mm x 26 tpi lens mount. Also (as the mount illustrates) Leicas were not exclusively metric. Where were you reading about it? I'd trust some sources more than others.

Cheers,

R.