Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/05/22
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]John (and others) Do you have any idea what one of these lenses sell for? I have one that I thought I would use with an M6, but since I have the newest 35/2 I really don't need it. All the ebay sales I've seen have been *with* a body. I've got to say this about this lens.... it is substantially smaller and lighter than the 35/2... John John Collier wrote: > Leica has always stated that the cams are of different design and will not > couple accurately. While the design is indeed different, the CL cam has a > shorter steeper cam, the depth of field of the 40 seems to make up for the > possible focusing inaccuracies. All anecdotal reports I have heard are that > it focuses just fine. The 40/2 is an excellent lens, just as good as its > contemporary 50/2 (11817). > > John Collier > > > From: Mike Quinn <mlquinn@san.rr.com> > > > > I've heard rumors about a difference in cam pitch, but so far no one has > > explained exactly what the difference is or what effect it has on focussing. > > Rumors without data are maddening! Does anyone (Sal?) have more precise > > information on where in the focusing range (and with which m-series bodies) > > problems might occur?