Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/11/25

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] Re: If only one more R lens,
From: Marc Attinasi <marc@attinasi.org>
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 19:28:15 -0800
References: <10e.8b1e024.2932fcbb@aol.com>

I think my R3 was made in Portugal (safari model). It may be cheap, but I love it
- - reliable, quiet and accurate. Anyway, as long as the body *works* then it is
all in the glass and the eye, no? I agree that $4000 in lenses for an R3 seems
strange though - $3000 in glass and a used R8 would be my choice, and I'd
probably get the 35 summilux and an 70-180 2.8 - oops, over budget already! :)

- - marc

SthRosner@aol.com wrote:

> How about remembering that our friend has started with an R-3 and 50
> Summicron-R. Yes, add a 90 (2,8?) and maybe the 25/4 Voigtlander/Cosina. But
> why not suggest a second R-body, say an R-6.2 or R-7? The R-3 is a budget
> Japanese Leica one can buy mint/mint for $325.-375. Then $4,000. for a set of
> lenses for that single body? Hmmm.
>
> Seth    LaK 9
> --
> 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

In reply to: Message from SthRosner@aol.com (Re: [Leica] Re: If only one more R lens,)