Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/05/09

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

Subject: Re: charlie's leicaflex lust (was: Re: [Leica] Re: Notta L, D, IC)
From: "charles walden" <charlie@highhill.com>
Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 13:41:55 -0400
References: <Springmail.0994.1020963031.0.81927700@webmail.pas.earthlink.net>

I can see this list is going to have a *bad* influence on me.

OK now that you've opened the door (or maybe I did)...

I have been to your pages on the leicaflexs (although I had not seen the
ones on close-up work - great info).

I couldn't find any particularly compelling reason to spend the extra money
for the SL2 vs. the SL.  It seems like the main difference is a more
sensitive meter.  Is that correct?  Is the sensivity an issue when saying
shooting at EI 260,  1/8th sec, f2 (I usually don't go too much outside that
range...)

I'm thinking about the 60mm macro lens as a first lens.  I can do closeups
and still have a lens that I can carry around and shoot with.

thanks
charlie

> This should get you started:
>
> http://www.wildlightphoto.com/leica/SL.HTM
>
> http://www.wildlightphoto.com/leica/close_up.html
>
>
> Doug Herr
> Birdman of Sacramento


- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

Replies: Reply from "Don Dory" <dorysrus@mindspring.com> (Re: charlie's leicaflex lust (was: Re: [Leica] Re: Notta L, D, IC))
Reply from Nathan Wajsman <wajsman@webshuttle.ch> (Re: charlie's leicaflex lust (was: Re: [Leica] Re: Notta L, D, IC))
In reply to: Message from Douglas Herr<telyt@earthlink.net> (charlie's leicaflex lust (was: Re: [Leica] Re: Notta L, D, IC))