[Leica] RE ASPHERICAL LENSES 35 vs 35 asph CLARIFICATION

[wlarsen at ocsnet.net (Will)]

Alexander Glissan writes:

> Sorry, let me rephrase
>
> What I meant to say was that the lenses, irrespective of their 
> spherical/aspherical nature, are all beautiful my 35 is an ASPH. I 
> love the shots from it, but the point, however badly put was.......
>
> I don't believe one should buy an ASPH lens because someone tells you 
> it is better, art is subjective. /snip/

Oh my, the voice of reason is not tolerated here.  My purchase for the 
year (or maybe more) was a used 280/2.8 APO (ca. 1984) with a bad 
scratch across the Leica emblem...and a pristine 1.4 extender... and  a 
macro-R adapter... I am having so much fun with it that it is like being 
reborn.  The lens seems to be wedded to the R6.  And the next time I go 
to the Sacto area, maybe I will lend it to Doug Herr for an 
evaluation.... BTW, I bought it from KEH which has a really bad habit of 
separating the protective filters and selling them separately... I 
declined the one that was shattered, but bought the other ones (they had 
three lenses for sale I bought the cheapest).  So if anyone needs a  
Leica 112 mm filter for the lens, make me an offer on the one I am not 
using  :)

Hopefully BD will not read this and comment on it. 

Regards, Bill Larsen, Terra Bella, CA