ML Archiv: Re: [OM] Re: Does this Qualify as a "Fang"

Olympus-OM

Re: [OM] Re: Does this Qualify as a "Fang"

from DAVDOU9211

Subject:	Re: [OM] Re: Does this Qualify as a "Fang"
From:	DAVDOU9211@xxxxxxx
Date:	Sun, 11 Nov 2001 18:13:09 EST

In a message dated 11/11/01 11:18:10 AM Pacific Standard Time, 
chenriks@xxxxxxxxxxxx writes:



Dave -- NO, you did WELL!!  -- You would do GOOD by sending it to me! :-)))

Craig


Oh Needful One!  You are truely infected with the Zuikoholism bug.

Dave

< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
[OM] Re: Does this Qualify as a "Fang", DAVDOU9211 RE: [OM] Re: Does this Qualify as a "Fang", Chip Stratton Re: [OM] Re: Does this Qualify as a "Fang", Tom Scales Re: [OM] Re: Does this Qualify as a "Fang", bhinderks [OM] Need some advice also 24 shift almost FS, M. Royer [OM] What's the next lens for you?, Tom Scales Re: [OM] Re: Does this Qualify as a "Fang", Terry and Tracey Re: [OM] Re: Does this Qualify as a "Fang", Craig Henrikson Re: [OM] Re: Does this Qualify as a "Fang", Doggre Re: [OM] Re: Does this Qualify as a "Fang", DAVDOU9211 Re: [OM] Re: Does this Qualify as a "Fang", DAVDOU9211 <=

Previous by Date:	[OM] Zuiko 200/4 on eBay: BIN $100, GMcGrath
Next by Date:	Re: [OM] teleconverter dilemma, Jim Brokaw
Previous by Thread:	Re: [OM] Re: Does this Qualify as a "Fang", DAVDOU9211
Next by Thread:	Fw: [OM] FS: OM-1, IS-3, and some other stuff (final call before Ebay), Clemente Colayco
Indexes:	[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]