Re: [Leica] which lens?

[Mark Rabiner <mrabiner@concentric.net>]

ckk wrote:
><snip>
> Just ask, "what do I use , and do I really need a heavy, expensive, and
> imposing- looking, superfast  Aspheric lens?"  If you are an experienced
> shooter, you already know what you need. That may include high speed or not.
> You either use fast film or fast lenses, this is obvious. If you've got the
> bucks,  buy em all. I'll still  bet only 2 focal lengths will be frequently
> used, or carried for that matter.
> 
> Kevin
> 

Kevin! I came over from Nikons too!
With a Leica M rangefinder camera your shooting style radically changes for the
better over SLR so we think. But with real premium glass in front we end up with
an image the SLR masses can't approach.
I think its a smart move to get a second body early on. I could never resist
another lens when I had the bucks. But you connote Aspheric's with speed and
money and that's not always the case. I like your approach to a pared down
optical kit but that 35 Summicron I would have to be the Aspheric. It is not
high end bucks wise. It is a cutting edge quality image maker at a doable price. 
This aspheric will give you an excellent wide open F2 when you need it and If
you don't have it- it's easy to convince yourself you don't need it. You use the
tools you have and you do what they let you do. It's not like F2 is all that
superfast. Plenty of people especially SLR users think of F2 as what they stop
down to. It's not like you don't have the bucks. You are buying a second body
now. It's a really question of what you spend your money on. You would get a
second body. I would upgrade my 35 to the aspheric. It's the main tool. 
I say the glass is more important than the camera. The camera supports the glass.
It's not the "room" it's the "hole in the wall" that counts. IMHO
Mark Rabiner
@hole in the wall photo.com