Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/02/25
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]No.2 in the portrait series, Rebecca, is stunning. B. On 25-feb-2006, at 9:49, Daniel Ridings wrote: > Steve, > > Evidently the modern version has been reformulated ... and is even > better. > > Here's some with the old one I have: > > http://gallery.leica-users.org/album13/05v23_0001 > http://gallery.leica-users.org/album08/04v44_0005 > http://gallery.leica-users.org/album08/04v44_0009 (bokeh shot) > > It lives on my M3, more or less. > > I've seen wonderful results with the modern forumlation and will pick > one up as soon as I run across one for a decent price. I like the old > one, but the new one seems to be in a class of its own. > > Daniel > > On 2/24/06, Steve Barbour <kididdoc@cox.net> wrote: >> Is there any optical difference between the old chrome 50/2.8 >> collapsible Elmars of the 1950's to 1974, and the newer 50/2.8 >> Elmars which were issued starting sometime in the 1990's... >> >> Does anyone experienced in using these lenses see any differences in >> the photos from them? >> >> Which vintage is preferable if in good shape, and the cost not >> considered? >> >> I appreciate your advice, Steve >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information