Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/10/04

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

Subject: [Leica] Re: New Zeiss Ikon
From: feli at creocollective.com (Feli di Giorgio)
Date: Mon Oct 4 13:19:48 2004
References: <00be01c4aa48$19514420$6401a8c0@ccapr.com> <5DA5DBC2-163E-11D9-9CFB-0003938C439E@btinternet.com>

On Mon, 2004-10-04 at 12:48, Frank Dernie wrote:
> But if you remember the M2 was originally sold as a stripped down 
> cheaper M3, quite a bit cheaper too, like S3 to SP Nikon. The auto 
> resetting counter was removed and a simpler less accurate cheaper to 
> make rangefinder was fitted (which people liked because a wider angle 
> of view went with the simplification).
> Frank


Although the magnification of the M2 is lower than the M3, .72 vs. .91
the base length is the same. Personally I prefer the M2, with the 35 frame 
lines. I'm also not a big fan of the round cornered 50 frame lines of the M3.

Feli



Replies: Reply from Frank.Dernie at btinternet.com (Frank Dernie) ([Leica] Re: New Zeiss Ikon)
In reply to: Message from bdcolen at earthlink.net (B. D. Colen) ([Leica] Re: New Zeiss Ikon)
Message from Frank.Dernie at btinternet.com (Frank Dernie) ([Leica] Re: New Zeiss Ikon)