Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2008/09/23

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

Subject: [Leica] 3.5/50 or 2.0/50
From: hoppyman at bigpond.net.au (Geoff Hopkinson)
Date: Tue Sep 23 20:14:35 2008
References: <113577.89129.qm@web84203.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

Hi Jan. I suggest you shoot a stack of film with each lens for your type of
photography and decide what you like. Much depends on the condition of each
lens too. Does it have to be only one of them that you keep ;-)
Please share some pictures with us once you get going. 


Cheers
Geoff
http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman/e
http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/gh/

-----Original Message-----
From: lug-bounces+hoppyman=bigpond.net.au@leica-users.org
[mailto:lug-bounces+hoppyman=bigpond.net.au@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of
Jan Decher
Sent: Wednesday, 24 September 2008 13:04
To: lug@leica-users.org
Subject: [Leica] 3.5/50 or 2.0/50

Hi LUG,
I am new to this list and just purchased a used chrome M6 and some older
lenses.  
Which one should I keep as the best (sharpest, best bokeh) user "normal"
lens: 
3.5/50 collabsible Elmar (last version with meter and feet scale) 2.0/50
collapsible Summicron (ca. 1954 version in feet only) Jan Vermont

_______________________________________________
Leica Users Group.
See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information



In reply to: Message from alcedo at verizon.net (Jan Decher) ([Leica] 3.5/50 or 2.0/50)