Re: Lens sets. Revere & Wollensak

[P3D <bjay@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Eric Goldstein wrote:

> In other words, is the Wollensak fixation driven by real
> performance or scarcity,  legend and the collectors? My
> scepticism is largely driven by the "f/2.7"  nomenclature,
> which seems to have been an attempt to make a marketing
> distinction  relative to 2.8 lenses, which even if were true
> would be totally meaningless.

At the time the Wollensak stereo camera came out, and in earlier
years, there was nothing unusual about f/2.7 lenses.  As a matter
of fact, Kodak's Pocket Instamatic Model 60, introduced in 1972
had an f/2.7 Ektar lens.

It's no more significant than the f/1.7, f/1.8, f/1.9 and f/2.0
lenses that we see as standard lenses on various SLR cameras.
I suppose it could be considered a marketing ploy, but I don't
really think that either the photographic manufacturers or the
photographic public were that naive.

Ben Melton



------------------------------