Re: Correction !: ULF lens wanted

From: Sandy King ^lt;[email protected]>
Date: 02/15/05-09:20:01 PM Z
Message-id: <a06020419be386b343f13@[]>


Thirty inches is about 735 mm, right? So you were not off base at all.

Nothing at all unusual about a lens that long. I recently sold one
that was 1100mm, or about forty-two inches. But I guess only the real
"ULF Honchos" would understand that a forty-two inch lens is really
no big deal.

Hope he finds what he is looking for. I would love to work with a big
Cirkut camera. Folks did some wonderful work with those cameras back
in the early part of the last century.


>Neighbor called tonight, delighted with the dossier I'd given him,
>said he'd talked to several of the references who were extremely
>helpful -- and that he'd gotten a lot of helpful info. However, he
>was embarrassed to say he'd been "so excited" when he talked to me
>originally that he'd cited the wrong number of inches.... Meaning of
>course that the folks who'd commented on the "wide angle" were (as
>usual) right ! He says it's actually 30 inches (THIRTY? Can a lens
>be 30 inches long that isn't on Mount Palomar?), though the six to
>eight hundred milimeter figure was correst.
>Actually, he's usually extremely excited when he's working,
>especially when approaching what he calls "a new persona"--- I
>expect he'll find the necessary sooner or later, and note the
>correction here for what it's worth. (I also hope 30 inches isn't
>going to break a window or knock down a street lamp. Ye gods !)
Received on Tue Feb 15 21:20:27 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 03/01/05-02:06:54 PM Z CST