Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/02/23

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

Subject: [Leica] The smallest M lens
From: richard at richardmanphoto.com (Richard Man)
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2012 21:24:53 -0800
References: <CAF8hL-EFb=wW39vQ0iaQ8nHKdbu2vg3OZe8PnxJTn5K2zB20-w@mail.gmail.com> <BB2D1AC326B24457A23FF938E00654DA@jimnichols>

They are.

On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 9:05 PM, Jim Nichols <jhnichols at 
lighttube.net>wrote:

> Nice images, Richard.  Looks like a winner.  Is this RF coupled?
>
> Jim Nichols
> Tullahoma, TN USA
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard Man" <
> richard at richardmanphoto.com>
> To: "Leica Users Group" <lug at leica-users.org>
> Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2012 9:01 PM
> Subject: [Leica] The smallest M lens
>
>
>  As I mentioned before, I love the Pera 35/3.5 lens. Collapsed, it's hardly
>> larger than a body cap so there really is no reason not to take the M
>> everywhere. This is the reason why I'm not interested m 4/3, X10 etc.
>> Sure,
>> it doesn't zoom or has liveview or do video, but comparing to an M9,
>> everything else just seems a bit lacking (except for the XPan of course
>> :-), or an Alpa, or an S2, or...) <-- my opinions only and I am talking
>> about for myself only. Everyone is entitled to their preferences.
>>
>> Anyway, the Pera 35 is no longer the smallest M lens. That honor is now on
>> another lens that Miyazaki san makes by hand: the Perar 28/4 Super Tpirlet
>> (the first batch all has the misspelling). It doesn't collapse and it's
>> smaller than the Perar 35 collapsed!
>>
>> Mine came in today and I just took a few quick test shots. The first shot
>> here is mainly to see what happens shooting into the Sun and it looks
>> pretty good. All photos have been processed a bit using LR. Nothing
>> heroic.
>> I also cropped the last two images a bit.
>>
>> All in all, looks like another winner. Now it's even more so of having no
>> excuse not to take the M9 everywhere!
>>
>> http://richardmanphoto.com/**PICS/20120223-L1009641.jpg<http://richardmanphoto.com/PICS/20120223-L1009641.jpg>
>>
>>
>> http://richardmanphoto.com/**PICS/20120223-L1009646.jpg<http://richardmanphoto.com/PICS/20120223-L1009646.jpg>
>>
>>
>> http://richardmanphoto.com/**PICS/20120223-L1009648.jpg<http://richardmanphoto.com/PICS/20120223-L1009648.jpg>
>>
>> --
>> // richard 
>> <http://www.richardmanphoto.**com<http://www.richardmanphoto.com>
>> >
>>
>> ______________________________**_________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See 
>> http://leica-users.org/**mailman/listinfo/lug<http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug>for
>>  more information
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See 
> http://leica-users.org/**mailman/listinfo/lug<http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug>for
>  more information
>



-- 
// richard <http://www.richardmanphoto.com>


In reply to: Message from richard at richardmanphoto.com (Richard Man) ([Leica] The smallest M lens)
Message from jhnichols at lighttube.net (Jim Nichols) ([Leica] The smallest M lens)