Viewer focusing (Re: What am I up to now?)

[Greg Erker <erker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>You mean some of you people actually read my sales pitches?!  Heck, you
>even remember them!  I'm in trouble now.

  :)


>I can see where you are coming from Greg. The MF kit does not wear out
>with focusing movement.  My original statement (which you paraphrased
>correctly) was more of an effort to make perfectly clear that this
>viewer did not have rack and pinion.  I didn't want people returning the
>viewer because of this.

  I see. I guess I put too much into what you
said.

>>From a historical standpoint, at that time on this list there was much
>discussion about using rack and pinion in a MF viewer, and it seemed
>that everyone felt it was necessary.  I think you were even in on the
>discussions (a looong time ago...).

  I was indeed there. I think
you've long since proven that it
isn't necessary. It still may be
a nicety to have. Though in my
past comparison of a top of the
line MF viewer to the Hugo de Wijs
Comby viewer it should be mentioned
that the Comby has (only) individual
focusing of each lens.

  Another historical discussion was
about the need for interocular adjustments
on MF viewers. I recall John B and perhaps
others working very hard to convince me that
it really wasn't necessary. It took quite
a while but I am now convinced.

>Thanks for the comments Greg.

  Always glad to help.

Greg E.