Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/12/30
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]>Help. > >Can someone take a look see at the digital image on this ebay page and tell >me if my description is lacking anything, e.g. is it really a Visoflex II, >what is the middle attachement called, etc? > >Thanks very much. Looks just like the one I just purchased Steve. I think I bought a Visoflex II though it was advertised in the paper as a Visoflex III. But it is not a III if Brian Bower's photographs and labels in "Leica M Photography" are correct. I have a silver 65mm lens on mine instead of the black lens pictured. I assume that the "middle attachment" is the 16466M unit and after that comes the lens. To tell you the truth I do not think Brian has it all correct on page 80 and 81 of his book. For instance I do not think I have the 16464 and 16471 units that he says goes between the Visoflex and my 65mm lens. Somewhere in Leica-land there must be some straight dope on all of this Visoflex stuff. I took some very very close photographs today with mine. At least I think I did. The water droplets hanging on a twig were not as clear as I expected/desire them to be when looking through the unit. Dale - --- $ dale-reed@worldnet.att.net Seattle, Washington U.S.A. $