Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/12/27

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Bokeh controversy
From: "Wilber Jeffcoat" <wilber@jeffcoatphotography.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2000 12:48:39 -0500
References: <20001226211258.13788.cpmta@c014.sfo.cp.net> <000901c0700a$6a31b400$aa6b193f@oemcomputer> <3A4A0C8C.F43C0B00@home.com>

Thanks, I will start the looking. Passed one up last summer as I was looking
for the 280, 2.8 and the price was really right ($450) Dumb, Dumb Dumb.
cheers Wilber
- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Ted" <tedgrant@home.com>
To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2000 10:36 AM
Subject: Re: [Leica] Bokeh controversy


> Wilber Jeffcoat wrote:
>
> > >>>>Thank you, so this then is a characteristic of the Leica lens and
really
> > has
> > nothing to do with the focal length. Next 250 f4 I see is mine.<<<<<
>
> Hi Wilber,
>
> If you find a f4.0 250 grab it quick as it's a beauty of a lens.  I had
one many
> years ago and in "my great wisdom" when I bought the 280 2.8 I sold the
250!
> Dumb mistake, but we only learn what we've lost after it's gone and wish
we
> hadn't been so stupid in our eagerness to be "lens efficient!" :-(
>
> It's a winner so look hard.
> ted
>
>

In reply to: Message from Doug Herr <merlin@flyingemu.com> (Re: [Leica] Bokeh controversy)
Message from "Wilber Jeffcoat" <wilber@jeffcoatphotography.com> (Re: [Leica] Bokeh controversy)
Message from Ted <tedgrant@home.com> (Re: [Leica] Bokeh controversy)