Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/06/18
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
Whoops! Should have read: The LTM Summaron 35 3.5 and 2.8 are optically
identical to their M mount counterparts.
I guess I better read before I send. :-(
The f3.5 was first and the f2.8 arrived when Leitz began using more exotic
glass to make lenses.
Is the Summicron worth the extra money? ???????????? Compared to the f3.5
version yes, IMHO, but I've never used the f2.8 version so I can't comment
on it. My local Leica dealer claims the 2.8 Summaron is as good as the
Summicron, but he has been known to be a little over enthusiastic when
trying to sell something.
Cheers!
kw
>On 18-Jun-98 Ken Wilcox wrote:
>> The LTM Summaron 35 3.5 and 2.8 are optically identical. The M was
>> available with and without RF goggles. The LTM was without goggles.
>>
>Why would they produce an optically identical lens in a slower model?
>Did the
>2.8 come after the 3.5? Is the summicron really worth the extra cash?
>--
>Michael Garmisa <elmar@webreach.com>
>18-Jun-98 10:47:39
- ----
Ken Wilcox Carolyn's Personal Touch Portraits
LHSA, MEA, LAW preferred---> <wilcox@umcc.umich.edu>
<kwilcox@gfn.org>