Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1996/11/16
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Bob, I use a Minox ML and could not agree with you more. The XA, I can't comment on since the only one I owned (it was brand new) I gave to a close and dear friend. I can not understand the following comment regarding the CL, though: Leica CL. None of them equals the image potential of my M3. Could elaborate on this remark, please. I think that if you pop the same 50 Summicron on each, the result should be the same. Are you really talking about the design limits re: inability of the CL to work with a 135mm? Or is the remark more towards the standard CL lenses vs. M lenses? The Summicron test was done with my CL and a friend who had a M6 and who borrowed the CL for the test. The conclusion that there was no difference was his, not mine. The purpose of the experiment was the result of a question regarding the design of the loading and film handling system of the M6 posed by one of his students. The test was also done with a RTSIII and RTS and there was a discernable difference in favor of the RTSIII. (again same lens - 45mm 2.8 pancake). No, I don;t know the specifics of the tests, since I did not have a direct interest in the outcome, though it did bouy up my belief that dispite all the CL is a great lens holder. Brian Levy, J.D. Agincourt Ont. dlevy@worldy.com