Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/05/28
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
This is a MIME message. If you are reading this text, you may want to
consider changing to a mail reader or gateway that understands how to
properly handle MIME multipart messages.
- --=_0153B3FB.0B6A067E
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Disposition: inline
Chip,
I'd probably take the Leica.... The 35-70mm and the 70-210mm
Angenieux's are housed in glass filled polycarbonate. The plus
side of that is that these two Angenieux's are lighter but are not
quite as smooth mechanically compared with the equivalent
lenses from Leitz/Leica. There are always pluses and minuses
aren't there!
Leica probably wont service (CLA) anything but the 45-90. That is
the only one of the Angenieux's that they recognize exists.
However, Don Goldberg (DAG Camera Repair) will do a CLA on
any of them.
P.S. The above doesn't apply to the 45-90mm and the 180 APO.
These beauties are all metal (aluminum/brass/steel) and are
just as mechanically smooth as Leica equivalents.
P. P. S. ALSO Make sure that if you intend to use the lenses
on R bodies, that they are "3 cam". A lot of these are only "2
cam".
Regards,
Dave Stedman
- --=_0153B3FB.0B6A067E
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Received: From [149.59.14.23] purg.atl.com
By corp.atl.com (GroupWise SMTP/MIME daemon 4.11)
Wed, 28 May 97 00:43:36 PDT
Received: from mail1.halcyon.com (mail1.halcyon.com [206.63.63.40])
by atl.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id AAA20157
for <dstedm@corp.atl.com>; Wed, 28 May 1997 00:43:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp2.nwnexus.com by mail1.halcyon.com (5.65v3.2/1.1.10.5/10Nov96-0444PM)
id AA13367; Wed, 28 May 1997 00:43:45 -0700
Received: from mejac.palo-alto.ca.us by smtp2.nwnexus.com with SMTP id AA12104
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for <dstedm@halcyon.com>); Wed, 28 May 1997 00:42:56 -0700
Received: by mejac.palo-alto.ca.us id AA17173; Tue, 27 May 97 23:46:04 -0700
Received: by mejac.palo-alto.ca.us id AA17167; Tue, 27 May 97 23:46:01 -0700
Received: (from root@localhost)
by emout05.mail.aol.com (8.7.6/8.7.3/AOL-2.0.0)
id CAA02127 for leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us;
Wed, 28 May 1997 02:45:57 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <970528024556_-162460894@emout05.mail.aol.com>
Sender: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 23:45:57 -0700
From: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
To: ChipZHZ@aol.com, leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Subject: Re: Angieneux Zoom for the R.... -Reply
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Disposition: inline
Thanks all for the feedback on the Angieneux 35-70....If the Angieneux and
the Leica 35-70 were the same price and condition, is one favored over the
other?( I do realize that the Angieneux is considerably larger....)?
thanks again,
chip
- --=_0153B3FB.0B6A067E--