Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/10/26

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] To Buy or Not to Buy: a Leica 0
From: "B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2001 12:50:57 -0400
References: <5.0.2.1.2.20011026002233.00a1ca50@pop.2alpha.net> <3BD96610.AD174A63@earthlink.net> <3BD98EAF.C30E156F@rabiner.cncoffice.com>

Damn, Marc, I am NOT making myself clear these days - time for dosage
adjustment...

My point didn't have to do with Leica producing the 50 anastigmatic in a
collapsible version. What I was saying was that if, as Pop contends, the
50 anastigmatic on the O is the second best 50 they've ever tested -
presumably better than the Summicron and Summilux - it is a very sick
joke that Leica provided such a lens for the O, rather than for the M or
R...

Clearer?

B. D.

Mark Rabiner wrote:
> 
> "B. D. Colen" wrote:
> >
> > Peter Klein wrote:
> > >
> > > Wouldn't it be nice if Leica produced the 50 Anastigmat lens in an
> > > RF-coupled collapsible LTM mount?
> > > At 07:31 PM 10/25/2001 -0700, Rei wrote:
> > > >in sept pop photo, page 90 in their review of the null:
> > > >
> > > >"superb performance [ from the 50mm f/3.5 Leitz Anastigmat ] --
> > > >  the second best 50mm lens we have ever tested (edged out only by
> > > >  the 50mm f/1.4 Zeiss Planar) ... when used within its parameters,
> > > >  this upgraded classic lens provides outstanding image quality."
> > > >
> >
> > IF, and I stress IF, this review is on target, and the lens in the O is
> > indeed the second best 50 mm Pop Photo has ever tested.....
> >
> > How truly sick is it that Leica would produce what would then be its
> > best 50 ever for something like the O, rather than produce such a lens
> > for the M and/or R, where it could be of real use to photographers
> > rather than collectors....oh, never mind. ;-)
> > --
> 
> A truly sick joke which i don't buy for a moment BD, Peter and all.
> Why would not the new collapsible Elmar be that kind of gem?
>         instead of a slight step down in quality because of less optical elements.
> 
> Mark Rabiner
> 
> Portland, Oregon
> USA
> 
> http://www.rabiner.cncoffice.com/
> --
> To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

Replies: Reply from "Eric" <ericm@pobox.com> ([Leica] Re: To Buy or Not to Buy: a Leica 0)
In reply to: Message from Peter Klein <pklein@2alpha.net> (Re: [Leica] To Buy or Not to Buy: a Leica 0)
Message from "B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net> (Re: [Leica] To Buy or Not to Buy: a Leica 0)
Message from Mark Rabiner <mark@rabiner.cncoffice.com> (Re: [Leica] To Buy or Not to Buy: a Leica 0)