Leica Compendium 2nd Edition announced

[john_newell]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thicker paper or more pages?

 

I guess I should have referred to the Leica Lens Compendium, which is what I meant with the reference to the "first edition." This book is titled the Leica Compendium, presumably because it covers cameras and some other topics that weren't in the original book. In any event, compared to the first Puts book (2003, 240 pages), the size increase is due to a zillion or so new pages, give or take a few.

 

I don't have a copy of the first edition of the new Leica Compendium, but changes in the second edition are summarized in a new section in the Introduction, under the heading "Second edition," which reads as follows:

 

The second edition is again a limited edition. Two paragraphs have been added: the new Super-Elmar-M 21mm f/3.4 ASPH is now included in the lens reports chapter and a new appendix that explains the difference between allocated serial numbers and production numbers and the confusion that is the result of this disregard.

 

More pictures and graphs have been included and several text sections have been updated or expanded.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[UliWer]

Can anyone who has the new edition of the so called "Leica Compendium" tell me whether there are changes in the following parts? I give the chapters and pages of the first edition:

 

Chapter 1.5, Section "The Leica M3 Introduction", p. 108:, list for Rangefinder Camera production with 80059 Leitz cameras for 1956.

 

Chapter 1.7, Section "New vision in lens design", p. 153 with a list of "all new designs for the M- and S-systems" with some odd names for current lenses and the Summilux-M 1:1,4/50mm ASPH. missing.

 

Chapter 3.1.1, p. 209: two identical photos of identical IIId cameras with text for the III and IIIa.

 

Chapter 2.3.2, last colored illustration on p. 194 with numbers from 1 to 12 but no explanation what they indicate.

 

Description for the Hektor 135mm f/4.5 (Chapter 7.2.80, p. 512) in large parts identical with description for the Hektor 125mm f/2.5 (Chapter 7.6. 3., p. 588).

 

Identical descriptions for the Telyt-V 200/f4 (Chapter 7.6.3 p. 590) and the Telyt (II) 400mm /f5 (Chapter 7.6.6., p. 592).

[Guest #12]

Can anyone who has the new edition of the so called "Leica Compendium" tell me whether there are changes in the following parts? I give the chapters and pages of the first edition:

 

Chapter 1.5, Section "The Leica M3 Introduction", p. 108:, list for Rangefinder Camera production with 80059 Leitz cameras for 1956.

 

Chapter 1.7, Section "New vision in lens design", p. 153 with a list of "all new designs for the M- and S-systems" with some odd names for current lenses and the Summilux-M 1:1,4/50mm ASPH. missing.

 

Chapter 3.1.1, p. 209: two identical photos of identical IIId cameras with text for the III and IIIa.

 

Chapter 2.3.2, last colored illustration on p. 194 with numbers from 1 to 12 but no explanation what they indicate.

 

Description for the Hektor 135mm f/4.5 (Chapter 7.2.80, p. 512) in large parts identical with description for the Hektor 125mm f/2.5 (Chapter 7.6. 3., p. 588).

 

Identical descriptions for the Telyt-V 200/f4 (Chapter 7.6.3 p. 590) and the Telyt (II) 400mm /f5 (Chapter 7.6.6., p. 592).

 

2nd ed.

p. 108... "1956 ... 47499 [Leitz cameras]."

p. 153 ... 50/1.4 included in table.

p. 209 ... two different cameras with captions for "model III" and "model IIId."

 

I will have to check the others

[pedaes]

Yes there are typos and grammatical errors in the second edition, but for anyone new to Leica (like me) it is a fantastic read. I guess the cost of the original "Lens Compendium" today gives a clue to Mr. Putts credibility.

[Guest #12]

(continued)

 

p. 194. No explanation for the illustration, but maybe it's borrowed from somewhere.

 

pp. 514, 590, 592, 594. Looks like a completely different description for each of the four lenses.

 

I've only read a couple of sections in the middle of the book; I found mislabelings, math errors, and typos. But looks like he corrected everything you mentioned.

[wda]

(continued)

 

p. 194. No explanation for the illustration, but maybe it's borrowed from somewhere.

 

pp. 514, 590, 592, 594. Looks like a completely different description for each of the four lenses.

 

I've only read a couple of sections in the middle of the book; I found mislabelings, math errors, and typos. But looks like he corrected everything you mentioned.

I discussed the question of amendments to his book with Erwin Puts at the weekend. (see separate thread). He said he had made many corrections to the second edition and noted many constructive comments from readers. However I think you have to judge the book in the context of an essentially one-man production. Erwin does practically everything himself: research, testing; reporting; writing; designing; proof-reading, production planning etc. Considering the inevitable infallibility of human beings, all those who met him at our meeting last weekend were impressed with his integrity, great depth of knowledge on Leica matters and his prodigious work ethic. Sure there will be some errors. Why not feed them back to him just in case he should publish a new edition. I think that is unlikely given his current project and the generally slow rate of completely new products.

 

I am not setting out to defend him, but to report my first-hand impressions of a highly respected author in his field.

[UliWer]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am surprised but glad, that all those points I mentioned above seem to be corrected in the new edition. To tell the truth, I didn't expect it; so even better that I stand corrected as well.

 

I ordered the first edition as soon as I heard about the project. Before I had the book I was sure that it would be a valuable addition to the literature about Leica because I trusted Mr. Puts. When I read the first edition I was soon very frustrated as I got the impression that it stood far beyond what we are used from this author in his former books and in his blog as far as reliability is concerned.

 

So I am optimistic that many other minor or major faults in the first edition won't be found in the new one.

 

As the new edition is also sold by some bookshops and a few Leica dealers, I would recommend anybody interested trying to find it their.

[Guest #12]

I discussed the question of amendments to his book with Erwin Puts at the weekend. (see separate thread). He said he had made many corrections to the second edition and noted many constructive comments from readers. However I think you have to judge the book in the context of an essentially one-man production. Erwin does practically everything himself: research, testing; reporting; writing; designing; proof-reading, production planning etc. Considering the inevitable infallibility of human beings, all those who met him at our meeting last weekend were impressed with his integrity, great depth of knowledge on Leica matters and his prodigious work ethic. Sure there will be some errors. Why not feed them back to him just in case he should publish a new edition. I think that is unlikely given his current project and the generally slow rate of completely new products.

 

I am not setting out to defend him, but to report my first-hand impressions of a highly respected author in his field.

 

Well, I think you have to judge a book by what's on the page, not the circumstances. I think for sure the book and website are "studenty" and needed an editor. This may be a comment more to the style than the content. In any case, there is no denying the time and passion thrown into the book, and it's great to have any book at all covering this kind of material. I would still hope for an errata sheet posted online.