Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/12/21
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Thanks to all those who commented (directly and through this forum) on the Tri-Elmar. I've now run two rolls through it and am quite pleased with it, though it will take some time to get to the point where the mechanics of changing focal length become instinctive. It is remarkably light -- about the same size and weight overall as my 2.8 Tele-Elmarit 90 -- and the images thus far are very sharp. Once again, thanks.///REB _________ At 10:11 PM 12/20/98 -0600, you wrote: >>The most likely reasons Leica >>chose the 28-35-50 for the Tri-Elmar is that a 35-50-90 would have >>eliminated sales of a second lens (90mm) to the hobbyist market. > >I would think the reason is it was easier to design. And a much lighter, >smaller lens. >-- > >Eric Welch >St. Joseph, MO >http://www.ponyexpress.net/~ewelch > >Stay alert - you can observe a lot by watching. Yogi Berra > >