Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/06/02
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]The 3E didn't quite live up to my expectations, though Erwin thinks I just got a bad one, which may indeed have been the case. Exchanged mine for an Elmarit-M 28 and am very pleased with it! What a wonderful lens. However, for hiking, I still take my R6.2 with the Elmar 35-70. The zoom range is right, and I like being able to take closeups when out in nature. Now, if they'd only make one with a front element that didn't rotate! And yes, I know the Elmarit 35-70 ASPH is polarizer-friendly. But it's much too large and heavy for comfortable hiking. - --Jim - -----Original Message----- From: m037iu00@cwcom.net [mailto:m037iu00@cwcom.net] Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 1999 12:51 PM To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us Subject: [Leica] Tri-Elmar use Robert, Surely this is where the Tri-Elmar would score, 3 focal lengths for day long trekking where space and weight are at a premium and exposures are not likely to be luminally challenged? Does anyone on the list use one of these lenses and enjoy it? I read that someone got rid of theirs... (I'm wishing, waiting, hoping, saving...) Jem ================================ Robert G. Stevens wrote: Last summer after using the Pro Trecker to carry lots of gear in Newfoundland, I got so sore and tired that I decided to leave the R's and lenses in the truck and use a M6 and the 35,50,90 combination when I did the trek up Gross Morne Mountain. The camera and lenses fit in a small waist pouch, padded by my spare socks. I found that these focal lengths were all I needed anyways. Regards, Robert