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

[Mark Walberg <Walberg@simmons.swmed.edu>]

Erwin, I agree completely.
I think I almost hear the teachings of Alf Bruell in your words.  Alf made
exactly this point in his posts quite a while back of Subjective Lens
Impressions.    He made the point that many users don't appreciate that
fact that the different 50mm Leica lenses differ in personality at least as
much as do the different focal lengths, and that with experience, one can
learn to use the lenses to get a desireable character in an image.   (Sorry
about the too long sentence.)   I'm glad to hear this point being made
again.
- -Mark Walberg

......
>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