Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/01/26

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] M9 vs E3
From: Jim at hemenway.com (Jim Hemenway)
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 20:24:37 -0500
References: <4B5F90CD.2040005@hemenway.com> <6AF05112-5C41-4AD3-933A-618E18B5EE71@embarqmail.com>

Try it, you'll get 600mm equivalency without the multiplier.

I did something similar a few years ago with my isDS.  This image had 
the Takumar 1000 mounted with the 2Xx doubler... 3000mm

http://www.half-fast.com/LongLenses/pages/102105-16-Tak1000-2X-1600.htm

http://www.half-fast.com/Takumar1000/index.htm

I was about 1 1/4 mile from the lighthouse.

Jim

Ric Carter wrote:
> i've been wondering if that might be a good path for replacing my OM-4 for 
> my meager telephoto work--mostly with a 300 Zuiko and multiplier.
> 
> ric
> 
> 
> On Jan 26, 2010, at 8:03 PM, Jim Hemenway wrote:
> 
>>  I'm relatively poor, so I don't have either the M8 or M9. Assuming that 
>> they're better, I can still print very convincing 11x14-ish sized prints 
>> from these:
>>
>> http://www.hemenway.com/OlympusE-510-with-Pentaxlens/
>>
>> For the $500 or so that I paid for it, the resulting prints look very 
>> food.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> 


In reply to: Message from Jim at hemenway.com (Jim Hemenway) ([Leica] M9 vs E3)
Message from ricc at embarqmail.com (Ric Carter) ([Leica] M9 vs E3)