Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/05/16

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
Subject: [Leica] 200mm test
From: imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser)
Date: Sun, 16 May 2010 14:59:48 -0500
References: <AANLkTilbK3EnpzZp0JIe6iqUaRXlVB-0X98U7g5duwLo@mail.gmail.com> <5A7B4795-BC2B-4158-8B44-13A2BD106DD3@mac.com> <AANLkTimawNeouMBK305ijHBOW6f2J1Yn5rEcN3cjdWkN@mail.gmail.com>
 
okay - I get it now.

and yes
lots of "relatively" impressive used glass
out there
from every manufacturer
for very attractive prices
for every conceivable format

and every conceivable adapter
to hang them on current digital bodies

exciting time to play with cameras and lenses

;~)

Regards,
George Lottermoser
george at imagist.com
http://www.imagist.com
http://www.imagist.com/blog
http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist

On May 16, 2010, at 2:08 PM, Vince Passaro wrote:

> to my eye rather intense and more than I expected.
> for a small light* $45 lens it surprised me.
Replies: Reply from douglas.sharp at gmx.de (Douglas Sharp) ([Leica] 200mm test/old lenses/adapters)
 In reply to: Message from passaro.vince at gmail.com (Vince Passaro) ([Leica] 200mm test)
Message from imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser) ([Leica] 200mm test)
Message from passaro.vince at gmail.com (Vince Passaro) ([Leica] 200mm test)