Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/06/03
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Jem: I've been using a Tri-Elmar for about nine months and like it very much. It took a couple of months to get accustomed to the mechanics of the device (the focal-length adjustment is where one instinctively expects the focusing ring to be, and the focal-length setting must be clicked precisely into one of the three detents or the lens will not focus properly), but I'm a three-rolls-a-week shooter, not a pro. The other limitation is its maximum aperture of 4.0. And then there is the price. The lens matches the M6 body wonderfully, though I also use it on my M3 as well in the 35 and 50 focal lengths (yes, the full glass of the M3 finder approximates the 35mm vield of view). Normally I carry a 90 Tele-Elmarit (skinny) on the second body. Image quality seems excellent -- easily better than my pre-Asph 35 Summilux. Most of my shooting is B&W, using TMX, TMY, and Delta 100. No flare, good contrast, great shadow detail. My read of the earlier post about a returned T/E was that the lens was not functioning properly, not that it was a bad design, but the message wasn't entirely clear.///Dick Baznik ___________ At 08:51 PM 6/2/99 +0100, Jem wrote: > Robert, >Surely this is where the Tri-Elmar would score, 3 focal lengths for day >long trekking where space and weight are at a premium and exposures are not >likely to be luminally challenged? >Does anyone on the list use one of these lenses and enjoy it? I read that >someone got rid of theirs... >(I'm wishing, waiting, hoping, saving...) Jem