Re: [Leica] 90 vs. 35

["Art Peterson" <peterson_art@hotmail.com>]

I'd suggest that it really depends on you, Carlos.  I myself like the 
35mm/50mm/90mm as an ideal three-lens combination.  But as you already 
have the 50mm Summicron and can add only one more lens right now, the 
important question is this: when you are out shooting with your 50mm 
lens, do you find yourself more often wanting to use a longer focal 
length lens or a shorter one?  Whichever it is, get that lens first; 
then get the other one later.  (For what it's worth, the 90mm lens is 
more different from your 50mm lens than the 35mm lens is, and 90mm 
lenses are probably less costly.)

Hope that helps!

Art Peterson


- ----Original Message Follows----
From: Carlos Blanco <cblanco@fibertel.com.ar>
To: leica <leica-users-digest@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Date: Thursday, April 22, 1999 2:11
Subject: [Leica] 90 vs. 35


>Dear luggers,
>    I know that this question may sound stupid for most of you, but I 
think
>that it is the best place to ask.
>    I own an M2 with a summicron 50mm. Now, I'm planning to buy my 
second
>lens and I cannot decide whether an Elmar 90mm f4 or a 35mm. In fact, 
I
>don't have money enough to aford an Elmarit 90mm so please don't 
suggest my
>buying an expensive 35mm. To make matters worse I don't know much 
about
>leica M 35mm lenses.
>    On one side, I would like the 90mm to take portraits, on the 
other I
>think that 35mm is what M2 was made for and I consider that lens 
usefull
for
>snapshots. I usually have to take photos with the camera placed on my 
waist
>and I think a 35mm would be ideal.
>    Well, I accept whatever suggest you want!
>    Leically
>
>carlos
>



_______________________________________________________________
Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com