Archived posting to the
Leica Users Group, 2003/12/28
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index]
[Home]
[Search]
Subject: Re: [Leica] Re: Re: DoF, was: Noctilux-M v. Summilux-R
From: "animal" <s.jessurun95@chello.nl>
Date: Sun, 28 Dec 2003 22:13:10 +0100
References: <002901c3cce1$d80e9c90$388a8418@symkeehx5nw8g8> <20031227201539.78162.qmail@web40909.mail.yahoo.com> <000f01c3ccc9$777428e0$87d86c18@gv.shawcable.net> <002901c3cce1$d80e9c90$388a8418@symkeehx5nw8g8> <5.1.1.6.2.20031228094538.03e28e98@mail.brick.org> <5.1.1.6.2.20031228122844.03e28fe0@mail.brick.org>
Sorry for that my wireless keyboard is failing ,mouse allready quit so i,m
dropping things.Should have taken more care.
I ment inaccurate.
Simon
- ----- Original Message -----
From: "JCB" <jcb@visualimpressions.com>
To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Sent: Sunday, December 28, 2003 9:31 PM
Subject: [Leica] Re: Re: DoF, was: Noctilux-M v. Summilux-R
> At 07:42 PM 12/28/2003 +0100, animal wrote:
> >Why ?they are not inaccuat are they?
> >regards
> >simon j
>
>
>
> >inaccuat ?
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
>
- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
In reply to:
Message from "animal" <s.jessurun95@chello.nl> (Re: [Leica] DoF, was: Noctilux-M v. Summilux-R)
Message from Lee <leeh0@yahoo.com> (Re: [Leica] DoF, was: Noctilux-M v. Summilux-R)
Message from Ted Grant <tedgrant@shaw.ca> (Re: [Leica] DoF, was: Noctilux-M v. Summilux-R)
Message from "animal" <s.jessurun95@chello.nl> (Re: [Leica] DoF, was: Noctilux-M v. Summilux-R)
Message from JCB <jcb@visualimpressions.com> ([Leica] Re: DoF, was: Noctilux-M v. Summilux-R)
Message from JCB <jcb@visualimpressions.com> ([Leica] Re: Re: DoF, was: Noctilux-M v. Summilux-R)