Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/06/13

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] Re: noctilux 50 f1.0
From: "Tom Schofield" <tdschofield@email.msn.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 16:18:15 -0700
References: <NCBBJJFDBJBLCEDPPLKGMEFHKJAA.msadat@pacbell.net> <3931AA75.1D2E62D2@home.com> <3.0.5.32.20000613172942.0090ed30@pop.microtec.net> <3946BE12.6978A915@rabiner.cncoffice.com>

Sorry, Mark, but he'll never see your response -- the "filter filter" pun
just got filtered!  I guess we'll now have to use f***** for Dan.

Tom

- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Rabiner" <mark@rabiner.cncoffice.com>
To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 4:04 PM
Subject: Re: [Leica] Re: noctilux 50 f1.0


> Dan Cardish wrote:
> >
> > To whom this may concern (and it may not concern very many at all):  If
> > anyone on the LUG posts something that they particularly want me to
read,
> > please do not have the word "filter"appear anywhere in the post.   Such
> > messages are automatically being filtered to the trash bin by my email
reader.
> >
> > Dan C.
> >
> Ah you've got the Filter Filter!
> Mark Rabiner!
>

Replies: Reply from Jim Brick <jimbrick@photoaccess.com> ([Leica] Re: Re: noctilux 50 f1.0)
Reply from Mark Rabiner <mark@rabiner.cncoffice.com> (Re: [Leica] Re: noctilux 50 f1.0)
In reply to: Message from mehrdad sadat <msadat@pacbell.net> ([Leica] noctilux 50 f1.0)
Message from Ted Grant <tedgrant@home.com> ([Leica] WAS: noctilux vs. the cheap alternative. now 50mm)
Message from Dan Cardish <dcardish@microtec.net> (Re: [Leica] Re: noctilux 50 f1.0)
Message from Mark Rabiner <mark@rabiner.cncoffice.com> (Re: [Leica] Re: noctilux 50 f1.0)