Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/01/26
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Buzzz To answer your first question ; NO To answer your second question: Yes, and I have the test negatives to prove it. No, I'm not a "missionary" for Leica. Jerry Buzz Hausner wrote: > ...perhaps a smidgen of hyperbole here? The 40/2.0 was a very fine and > sharp lens, but sharper than the 50 Summicron or the 135 Tele-Elmar? > That said, I greatly regret selling my forty, although I have not for a > moment missed the CL that went with it. Don't get me started on the > troubles with the CL! > > Buzz Hausner > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us > [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us] On Behalf Of Jerry > Lehrer > Sent: Sunday, January 26, 2003 7:50 PM > To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us > Subject: Re: [Leica] RE: CL Lense designs & other Leica Minolta history. > > Manny > > You are complaining about a lens which was never produced for > sale. The 40mm f2 was probably the sharpest non-aspheric lens > that Leitz ever sold. The f2.8 was a non-starter. > > Jerry > > -- > To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html