Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/03/29
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]IF you don't need a 2.8. ;-) -----Original Message----- From: lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org [mailto:lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of Nathan Wajsman Sent: Monday, March 29, 2004 3:16 PM To: Leica Users Group Subject: Re: [Leica] M 135 Opinions/Comments/Anecdotes/Cautions Greg, Erwin is absolutely, totally right about the Apo lens. I had one, and it was fantastic. I did sell it in the end, because I found that I was not using the 135mm focal length enough to justify the investment. But if you do use 135mm, and can afford the Apo, there is simply no other lens worth buying. Nathan Gregory Rubenstein wrote: > > Group: > > Will soon buy an M 135 mm and would like users' > opinions/comments/anecdotes/cautions about the 3.4 APO and old glass > (such as the 2.8). Have read Erwin Puts material, but would like some > hands-on input closer to the photo world I inhabit. Lean toward a new > 3.4 simply 'cuz I've had wretched luck over the years with anything > used; must admit, however, that I am tempted by the extra stop and > significant price differential of the old glass. > > On- and off-list user replies welcome. > > Thanks. > > Greg Rubenstein > gcr910@msn.com > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get rid of annoying pop-up ads with the new MSN Toolbar - FREE! > http://toolbar.msn.com/go/onm00200414ave/direct/01/ > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information -- Nathan Wajsman Almere, The Netherlands e-mail: n.wajsman@chello.nl Mobile: +31 630 868 671 http://www.nathanfoto.com/index.html _______________________________________________ Leica Users Group. See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information