Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/12/02
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]At 09:35 PM 12/1/97 -0800, you wrote: >I see it; If I get the Leicaflex, I can get those 1 Cam lenses which >are substantially less money. Now, if I do that....am I sacrificing lens >quality? Are the 1 cams glass as good as the 3 cam? Now as for the SL, Yes and no. The 1 cam lenses are very good lenses. I've owned a few (modified to 3rd Cam) and they did just fine. The price is right to get into Leica. >I can get the 2 cams...yes less than 3 cam, but is the SL THAT different >than the Leicaflex? Now, as far as the R3 goes....I still have to get Yes, you want the SL. It's better enough to justify the difference in price. Just stay away from a 50th Anniversary SL. <G> >those expensive 3 cam lenses. As you can see a small dilemma. As usual, >any help would truly be appreciated as I am going to a camera show this >weekend and I'd like to hunt around. With the SL, there are some lenses that won't work on it. For example the 15mm lens, or the 35mm Summilux R, and some others, maybe the 24 Elmarit? Their elements stick out too far in back and would catch on the mirror. And you have to buy a different 2X converter for SLs, and the Macro Adapter is different for the SL cameras. Or was it the extension tubes? But lots of 3 cam lenses work with them. ========== Eric Welch St. Joseph, MO http://www.ponyexpress.net/~ewelch When there's a will, I want to be in it.