Re: [Leica] [Leica} which M lens to choose or sell?

[Mikiro Mori <arbos@silva.net>]

Hi, I would second Erwin's opinion.  I seriously considered trading my 75mm
'lux for the new 90 'cron asph.  However, I am worried about the possibility
that the new 'cron-asph is inorganicly too sharp.  My 35/2 asph keeps
surprising me with its shapness at wider apertures, but I do miss the warm
tone that old Leica glass has.  To my eyes, the 75/1.4 is well balanced with
sharpness and capability in rich tone reproduction.  I have no idea what
Leica engineers will aim at in lens design.  But I do hope that they will
keep respecting "good reproduction" as well as "high fidelity".

Mikiro
Strasbourg

- -----
At 11:56 PM +0200 30/7/99, Erwin Puts wrote:
>The discussion between Nathan and Mark makes interesting reading.
>There are rational choices about focal length. You could select your
>lenses in such a way that every focal length you want to have is
>covered by M, or by a combination of M and R.
>Here you choose basically for changes in perspective.
>Many  Leica users ask me by phone or email if I can recommend a prime
>set of M lenses. Well after much reflection I am afraid I cannot
>select a core set of lenses for the M.
>The point is this: every current lens in the M lineup has a very
>different characteristic or individuality. You might argue: I have a
>new 90 so I do not need a 75. True to a certain extent. But the 75
>has very different imagery from the new 90. These image differences
>are not so small that only I can see them. Everyone can.
>So selling your 75 or 90 is not only selling a certain
>perspective/focal length, you are selling an optical  personality
>that might serve you well if you are in the game of subtle image
>speak.
>I have the 75 and bought a new 90 (apo). At first thought I would
>sell the 75. Then I looked again at the pictures and deceided to keep
>the 75. Its fingerprint is unique. It's optical performance at f/2 is
>indeed below the apo-90 at f/2, but the individual balancing of
>residual aberrations gives it  a personality. This lens speaks image
>language very fluently.
>So I keep it.
>The same goes for the 2/35 asph and the 1.4/35 asph. In fact you
>should have both. There are more differences than  maximum aperture
>to discuss. Both lenses have their own personality traits and an
>image with the 2/35  asph will have a different feeling than one
>taken with the 1,4/35 asph.
>This is not fantasy island. Leica lenses deserve a very educated look.
>
>
>Erwin