Re: [Leica] Re: What travel lenses (whither the 50)?

[Dennis Painter <dpainter@bigfoot.com>]

Mike Quinn wrote:
> 
> Although I subscribed to the theory that 35 and 90 are good enough for
> years, I don't think it's true with the M-series.
> 
> Look at your 35 mm negatives. Do you crop them? A lot? If so, you need a 50
> mm lens. There's a world of difference between 35 and 90.
> 
> No matter how good your lens is, when you crop and enlarge to get the image
> you want, you're losing resolution. The more film your image takes up the
> better your results will look.
> 
> Another irrelevant two cents,
> Mike Quinn

Hi Mike,

I don't subscribe to it as a THEORY, but a COMPROMISE.

Even if you carry 21, 24, 28, 35, 50, 75, 90, 135, and the 15. You still
have to move around to frame pictures. Even with a zoom you have to move
because a bit to the left or right changes the image.

It's a personal thing, what do you take pictures of and how much
compromise do you accept.

And if you carry too many focal lengths you can end up thrashing between
them as perfectly good images disappear before your eyes. With one lens
this doesn't happen, two lenses of significantly different application
and it shouldn't happen all that often. Thats the compromise with the 35
and 90, they fit greatly different types of photos and don't clash.

Don't get me wrong though, it's going to be a compromise. But I think
too many lenses quicly get in the way of seeing.

Bests,
Dennis