algrove Posted February 16, 2012 Share #101 Posted February 16, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) OP so did you sell? If so, then maybe it was yours I just bought, Serial # 3948xxx and 6 bitted by Solms in Aug 2011. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 16, 2012 Posted February 16, 2012 Hi algrove, Take a look here Should I sell my MATE?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
msAdele Posted February 17, 2012 Share #102 Posted February 17, 2012 I agree with everyone. You should. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stanjan0 Posted February 17, 2012 Share #103 Posted February 17, 2012 You should "WHAT":confused: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ecar Posted February 17, 2012 Share #104 Posted February 17, 2012 OP so did you sell? If so, then maybe it was yours I just bought, Serial # 3948xxx and 6 bitted by Solms in Aug 2011. Sold/bought as V2 or V3? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
haroldp Posted February 17, 2012 Share #105 Posted February 17, 2012 You should "WHAT":confused: Whatever ! My MATE is by a large margin the lens most often used on my M9. I also have a full bag of Leica (and Zeiss and VC) primes. .... H Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted February 19, 2012 Share #106 Posted February 19, 2012 Sold/bought as V2 or V3? Heck, I don't know. It was sent to Solms in Aug 2011 due to need for base plate so NJ tells me and also 6 bit coded in Solms. Still not sure what a v3 is versus v2. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stanjan0 Posted February 19, 2012 Share #107 Posted February 19, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) There is no Version 3 re: E Puts Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted February 20, 2012 Share #108 Posted February 20, 2012 Heck, I don't know. It was sent to Solms in Aug 2011 due to need for base plate so NJ tells me and also 6 bit coded in Solms. Still not sure what a v3 is versus v2. I bought it a month ago. According to Wiki it was built in 2002-the last 1000 they mention as built in 2002. Is what is confusing is the Total Assigned Serial Numbers 1996-2005 because if you add up all the production years (except the 1450-who knows what that is) then there is no 2005 production to add in. 8575 is the number for 1996 to 2002. Very confusing. Leica NJ told me that it was sent to Solms for a new redesigned Mount, I guess due ti request by the previous owner to 6 bit code it. I see Leica Wiki talks about that redesigned mount and also mentions V3 after S/N 3507451. The hood I got with it is a #12450. I did not get the VF #12011 with it. Have never seen one either. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stanjan0 Posted February 24, 2012 Share #109 Posted February 24, 2012 Look guys, gals there is a simple way to end this controversy once and for all, some one call Leica in Germany and simply ask "How many of all types of the Mate were produced by the factory", then ask"What were the serial numbers?". Its that simple providing of course that they answer, I suggest that that the number one Luca maven Edwin Puts make the call as he probably has the standing that Leica respects. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stanjan0 Posted October 31, 2012 Share #110 Posted October 31, 2012 I have perused this thread several times since my last post in February of this year and there were no additional comments or anything:confused:. What gives it is still one of Leica's most versatile lens in short supply with no chance of renewal. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
spylaw4 Posted October 31, 2012 Share #111 Posted October 31, 2012 I'm not going to read through 6 pages. Simple answer - don't sell it. Why? You'll always regret selling and soon want another, and have to pay through the nose for one. (Same as most Leica lenses) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted October 31, 2012 Share #112 Posted October 31, 2012 I had a version two about 9 years ago and the only thing I regret about selling it is that I didn't hang on to it longer and sell it after the prices had gone through the roof. As with many things Leica, it is an ingenious and beautifully made product, but I found it rather limiting in use (F4, 1m closest focus) and the proportions/balance not at all 'M-like'. Maybe a foretaste of the contortions some M users are proposing to put themselves through in using the new M 240 with all manner of non-M lenses? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
billo101 Posted October 31, 2012 Share #113 Posted October 31, 2012 Yes Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 31, 2012 Share #114 Posted October 31, 2012 Don't sell imo. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaspart Posted October 31, 2012 Share #115 Posted October 31, 2012 I'm thinking about selling mine (V1) as well. It's a great lens and technically a masterpiece but I don't feel it's made for me. I like to carry my M6 in the hand rather then hang it around the neck and for this the MATE is too heavy and feels unbalanced. I dislike the finder blockage on the 35 and 28 settings. f4 isn't a problem IMHO. I don't know if you should sell yours but I'm going to sell mine and stick to the summicrons. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
efreed2754 Posted October 31, 2012 Share #116 Posted October 31, 2012 Interesting thread. Do we know what the op did? I bought mine after visiting Giverny. So many pictures, so little time to change and take shots. This lens excels when might miss for changing lenses and then getting dust/dirt on your sensor. I travel with 18, 35 summicron, 50 lux and 75 lux or 90 2.8 plus MATE. Might take just 18, MATE and 75 or 90 at a time if enough light. Primes are best but if just one lens during daylight MATE can't be beat. The new M seems to make MATE even more valuable with higher ISO Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stanjan0 Posted November 1, 2012 Share #117 Posted November 1, 2012 Too many guys to thank but, I do want to thank you all for at least answering and or posting their thoughts re: this "very useful dinosaur". :):) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stanjan0 Posted December 30, 2012 Share #118 Posted December 30, 2012 I bought the version #1 not knowing there was a version #2 and used it on my 78 day cruise to the Orient. My images were excellent in my eyes as I'm no pro far from one to say the least. When I returned home I then discovered that there was a version #2 and as my wife could afford it I bought it. Do I see any difference between them as far as image quality, no. So why did I buy it thats a good question? So please let me hear from you users and readers your experience with either of the two. If there are also owners of both version 1 and 2 that would be icing on your response. :) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
k_g_wolf ✝ Posted December 30, 2012 Share #119 Posted December 30, 2012 The lens it well sought after, so it should be easy to sell one of them. Keep the one you find best. Both lenses have the same optical cell, version II was improved mechanically, but if both work well with your camera you are "free" to decide. It´s a great travellens and you should be envied to have two of them ... Best GEORG Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stanjan0 Posted December 30, 2012 Share #120 Posted December 30, 2012 Georg, thanks for your reply. I guess not too many people click on this thread, as you can see responses are far and few between. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.