05-19-2011, 04:26 PM
(This post was last modified: 05-19-2011, 04:26 PM by Brightcolours.)
[quote name='joachim' timestamp='1305736874' post='8530']
That one goes back to the review of 500mm lenses in the Geman Color Foto around 1980. The review was written by Walter E Schön. He compared essentially all 500/8 mirror lenses than available and had a few non mirror lenses to give perspective. The Beroflex was 200DM back then (about 100€) and it performed very well, beating most (all?) of the mirrors. The reviewer coined the name "Wundertüte" in that context.
The winner was the the Zeiss Mirotar 500/4.5 which beat that pants out of every thing. He named that the "unvergleichliche Zeissmonster".
The test was done, when there was no widespread use of Flourite, ED glass, etc. and chromatic aberration was a real issue in long glass. Back then Mirror lenses are easier to correct.
J.
[/quote]
Very nice background story! <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />
That one goes back to the review of 500mm lenses in the Geman Color Foto around 1980. The review was written by Walter E Schön. He compared essentially all 500/8 mirror lenses than available and had a few non mirror lenses to give perspective. The Beroflex was 200DM back then (about 100€) and it performed very well, beating most (all?) of the mirrors. The reviewer coined the name "Wundertüte" in that context.
The winner was the the Zeiss Mirotar 500/4.5 which beat that pants out of every thing. He named that the "unvergleichliche Zeissmonster".
The test was done, when there was no widespread use of Flourite, ED glass, etc. and chromatic aberration was a real issue in long glass. Back then Mirror lenses are easier to correct.
J.
[/quote]
Very nice background story! <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />