Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/12/29
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Sorry Jim. The 50/2.0 is correct. Summitar it is. I can never keep those two straight. It's a pretty clean one. The contrast seems to be ok: The first one was taken wide-open and the second one pretty close (2.8? maybe wide-open even it). http://gallery.leica-users.org/album08/05v51_0005 http://gallery.leica-users.org/album08/05v51_0021 But don't point it down south in December: http://gallery.leica-users.org/album08/05v51_0012 I've only put a few rolls through it. I'm not real sure about it. At comparable f-stops, there's nothing wrong with the Elmar and at the wider stops, it has some very stiff competition from the Russian Jupiter-8 (also 50/2.0). It has the edge over the Jupiter-8 because it is collapsable, but not much of an edge. I feel it in my pocket. The IIIf and the Elmar make a beautiful package for my inside coat pocket. Thanks for pointing out the typo! Best, Daniel On 12/29/05, Jim Nichols <jhnichols@bellsouth.net> wrote: > Daniel, > Your caption on the second photo says, "50/2.0 Summarit". Is this a one of > a kind, or is yours the more common 50/1.5. In any case, it looks like > you > have a nice lens. The contrast is much better than I could accomplish when > I owned a Summarit many years ago. > Jim Nichols > Tullahoma, TN USA > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >