I mixed up the scales of the two versions. It is a Type I, look at the slightly thicker black ring at the front, when looking at the side view. The switch happened somewhere in the 40000 region. Only the Type II has the distance units in both metres and feet (at least I haven't seen one where it is different) Padam wrote: It is a Type I, look at the slightly thicker black ring at the front, when looking at the side view. On the Type I it has single line, with just feet or m, on the Type II it has both ft/m in two rows one above the other.ĭid this kind of thing change along the way, or depend on market (Japan vs US)? Was confused by the focus distance measurements. Life is too short to let us try every lens! The best lens is the one you have with you. #50MM SUMMILUX SERIAL NUMBERS SERIAL NUMBERS#List of Rodenstock Interchangeable Lenses for 35mm cameras with Serial Numbers In my bag: Sony A7II - Olympus OM 21mm f/3.5 - Minolta M-Rokkor 40mm f/2.0 - Konica Hexanon 57mm f/1.2 AR - Olympus Zuiko OM 100mm f/2.8 - Pentax 135mm f/3.5 Love it, quality is great, rendering is wonderful, happy with the handling.ĭoing a little research on it though, I'm now confused.īut the serial number is 35446, which according to other sources (link below) means it's an early Type II. Meanwhile wrote: I recently purchased a Canon 50mm f/1.4 LTM. Posted: Wed 1:04 pm Post subject: Confused about a Canon 50mm f/1.4 LTM
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |