Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/01/26

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] The 40/2.0 Was Sharp, But...
From: Craig Zeni <clzeni@mindspring.com>
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 21:17:20 -0500
References: <3E348254.9DBDCB34@pacbell.net>

At 08:40 PM 1/26/2003, you wrote:
>...perhaps a smidgen of hyperbole here?  The 40/2.0 was a very fine and
>sharp lens, but sharper than the 50 Summicron or the 135 Tele-Elmar?
>That said, I greatly regret selling my forty, although I have not for a
>moment missed the CL that went with it.  Don't get me started on the
>troubles with the CL!

I have been rooting thru the archives looking for info on how to frame the 
40 on an M6.  Anybody have a well-tested method?


- --
Craig Zeni - REPLY TO -->> clzeni at mindspring dot com
http://www.trainweb.org/zeniphotos/zenihome.html
http://www.mindspring.com/~clzeni/index.html

In dog years, I'm dead.

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

Replies: Reply from "Don Dory" <dorysrus@mindspring.com> (Re: [Leica] The 40/2.0 Was Sharp, But...)
In reply to: Message from Jerry Lehrer <jerryleh@pacbell.net> (Re: [Leica] RE: CL Lense designs & other Leica Minolta history.)