[Leica] Is it just me?

[photo.forrest at earthlink.net (Philip Forrest)]

When I was handling the M8 a few weeks ago, I heard about this new
Tri-Elmar, the wide angle one.  16/18/21 correct?  Now, at f/4 aren't we
giving up a little bit of light for these three focal lengths?  That is, Why
not just have a 15mm or a 16 or the 21?  A person could get a 21 a full stop
faster or at the same speed, you could get a range of focal lengths for the
same price as the new wide angle zoom.  I'm only saying this because the
difference between 16mm and 21mm is so slight that you can walk it in 6
steps.  I can't imagine looking at a scene and saying "if I only had a lens
two millimeters longer (or wider)."  instead, I'd just take two steps and
shoot.  Three focal lengths, very close to each other in appearance, less
speed, greater size and more weight.  Granted, I'll not be able to afford
one, but it seems like this marketing of Leica's is in the wrong place.
It's an expensive lens to make and the company needs to make up the costs of
production as well as make a profit, hopefully keeping themselves alive for
years to come.  This looks like it will be a connoisseur's/collector's lens
at best but is that were the company should be concentrating it's marketing?
Perhaps I missed the thread where the new Tri-Elmar wide was run through
it's paces, but it just seems like a solution for a problem that never
existed.

Philip