Okay, I'm getting personal here again. I confess to having dropping the reciprocal question "What is the M-lens you use least (assuming you already own it)" under http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=006Ozt. As to your likes, I already know a few answers as some of you have already said something like this elsewhere here and I noted them out of all my print-outs in the giant 3-ring binder I took on this summer holiday's daily visits to the beach.

Could you jot down even one line to the effect of: "if I could hang onto only one single..." -- "my second favourite would be..." -- "if I could keep all three..." ?

For me, it'd be 2/35A > 2/50 > 21A (and I own only these three). I know, I know, it's a matter of what you like too: places, people, etc, but I don't always know what we love and hate.

Thanks. Mike

-- Michael Kastner (kastner@zedat.fu-berlin.de), October 22, 2001

Answers

1. S'cron 35 pre-asph 2. Elmarit 28 3. S'crom 90 pre-asph

-- Bert (bkkn@wanadoo.nl), October 22, 2001.

As for subjects, with my Leica Ms, it is usually real people in real places. For more considered photography, I'll go with an SLR with a 100% finder.

On Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays, my hierarchy of M series lenses would be: 1. 50mm Summicron, 2. 35mm pre-aspheric Summicron and 3. 90mm Elmarit M. On the other days of the week, I would swap the first and second choices. As for the third choice, that is a distant third. If not for my self imposed rule, "Never sell Leica gear!", I would get rid of the 90mm in a monetary pursuit of a 24mm Elmarit.

Of course, I would imagine that the acquisition of a 24mm lens would cause the list to go something like 35mm, 24mm, and the 50mm.

-- Al Smith (smith58@msn.com), October 22, 2001.

50 Summicron 35 pre asph Summicron 90 Tele Elmarit are my favorites in that order. They are my constant traveling companions.

Steve

-- Steve Belden (otterpond@tds.net), October 22, 2001.

1) 35mm Summicron ASPH. 2) 50mm Summicron. 3) 90mm Summicron. 4) 21mm/f2.8 ASPH.

I have a 135mm/f4 that I rarely use.........

-- Muhammad Chishty (applemac97@aol.com), October 22, 2001.

With Leica M, my most-used lens is the Tri-Elmar, followed by the current 90 Elmarit and 35/1.4ASPH. However if I could keep only one lens it would unquestionably be the 50/2.

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), October 22, 2001.

Interesting question Mike...

1) If I were limited to 1 lens it would be the 35 'lux asph. 2) If I could have 2, they would be the 24 and 50 'lux (new style). 3) If I could have 3, it would be the 21, 35 'lux asph and 90TE. 4) If I could have 4, I'd add the 50 'lux or the 3E to number 3.

Also, best advice so far was what Andy said above - Never sell a Leica lens! Speaking from experience, I have essentially re-purchased every Leica lens I've ever sold!

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), October 22, 2001.

My answers are asymmetrical.

if one, 35/2 ASPH. if two, 24/2.8 ASPH, and 50/2. if three, 21/2.8 ASPH, 35/2 ASPH, 75/1.4

Note that I don't own the 21 or 75 (yet), but their choice is a result of what I know I'd choose now, having done a lot of shooting with my M kit.

-- Godfrey (ramarren@bayarea.net), October 22, 2001.

I don't know why, but I feel like I don't need the wide angles that much, hence the following hierarchiy

Most beloved: 50/2 Sonnar SM > 90/4 Elmar C > 35/2.8 Summaron = 3.5/3.5 Elmar SM - I'm not so sure concerning the last ones. And don't know where to put my 'new' Summar (not really used yet).

Interestingly I have the same hierarchy with my SLR, starting with the 50/1.7 >= 85/2.8 > 35/2.8 > 24/2.8

Long tele lenses would be somewhere below that - one of the reasons I don't own any.

-- Kai Blanke (kai.blanke@iname.com), October 22, 2001.

Wow, that was fast! It wasn't just for me to know who loves what, but also the lens-combi-ness or partnership stuff. Duos or trios might spread over a balanced area like 35+50 or 35+75 or 28+50+90 etc. That's what my Tri-Elmar would have to look like. Or 24+35+75. I guess nobody has as a favourite pair 21+24 or 75+90 (ditto of course for one length's 'cron plus 'lux, har har.) Then it's the question of how high and how low can we go. Roberto once said 21+135 were too extreme for him (but I'm an extremist myself.) Finally, maybe somebody needs/wants for their unavailable light only the three 'luxes and/or the 28 and 90 'cons (no, no, no, don't need to get into size and weight and dough here).

And Jack, you hit the nail right on my head!! Maybe I should (also) have asked (a) "if I could only have one lens... (b) "or two... (c) "or three..."

Thanks for all of your responses here!!!

-- Michael Kastner (kastner@zedat.fu-berlin.de), October 22, 2001.

Intreresting question and interesting answers;

here´re my diferent combos (with bodies)

1)35/2 + M4P; daily use for walking in a waistpack, may add a 50/2 + M3 in shoulder.

2)35/1.4 + M4P and 90/2 + M3; if travleing by car for few days, in a larger waistpack.

3)28/2.8 + M4P, 35/2 + M4P and 50/2 + M3, if a photo work day in a f- 803.

4)If I ever have to go for good, the same as 3 plus a 21/3.4 and 90/2 and a extra M3.(never done this)

-- r watson (al1231234@hotmail.com), October 22, 2001.

Well if NG hires me I´ll take my parrot too man.

-- r watson (al1231234@hotmail.com), October 22, 2001.

Well, I'm waiting for Rob Appleby's answer here as he said his least used lenses are the 50/2 and 90/2.8. Whadyalike Rob?

For me, since I only have two lenses, its the 35/2A and 50/2 in that order. Still dreaming of a 50/1.4 ASPH (or equivalent advancement in optical performance).

-- Dan Brown (brpatent@swbell.net), October 22, 2001.

I only just got here! I use the 24/2.8 asph and 35/1.4 exclusively. I haven't ever taken a picture with the others that I would consider worth putting anywhere else than in a wedding album. All my perional work is with those two lenses. Sometimes I wish the 24 was a 21.

-- rob (rob@robertappleby.com), October 22, 2001.

Hektor 28, Summicron 50 Dual Range, Tele Elmar 135 and M6 is, for me, the ideal set for mountain

-- Marco Battelli (mbattelli@libero.it), October 22, 2001.

50 /1.4, 35 /1.4ASPH, 90 /2.8 Elmarit-M for daytime walking around with 1 camera tri-e

-- Hank (hgraber@narrativerooms.com), October 22, 2001.

First choice, 35/1.4A; second choice, 35/1.4A and finally 35/1.4A.

Cheers,

-- John Collier (jbcollier@powersurfr.com), October 22, 2001.

John:

Why don't you tell us all how you really feel about the 35/1.4 A? ;-)

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), October 22, 2001.

Not bad, John. And the three bodies, are they quite similar, too?

-- Michael Kastner (kastner@zedat.fu-berlin.de), October 22, 2001.

Well John, if I ever master the subtle diferences and particular caracteristic of these three 35´s that I have, I´d go 35/2 + M4P, 35/1.4 + M4P, and M3 + 35/2.8 summaron with googles, and of course I still would lack of that asph music that is your ONLY choice, you make me curious my friend.

Probably after that there is no need of anything else.

-- r watson (al1231234@hotmail.com), October 22, 2001.

One only: Summicron 50 two only: Add Summicron 35 asph. Three: Add Elmarit M 90.

-- Tim Gee (twg@optushome.com.au), October 22, 2001.

In the city a 50/2.0 summicron ready to shoot, with a 35/2.0 summicron in my pocket. In the Rockies, hiking, again the 50/2 on my M4P plus T.E 90/2.8 on M3, 35/2.0 in pocket. 135/4.0 stays at home or in the car.

-- Hans Berkhout (berkhout@cadvision.com), October 23, 2001.

1) 35f2 Asph; 2) 50f2 (current); 3) 75 f2.8 T/E APO ASPH(doesn't exist yet, but I'm still hoping for a smaller, lighter tele some day)...

-- Ken Prager (pragerproperties@worldnet.att.net), October 23, 2001.

I. Godfrey, actually, I wouldn't say "asymmetry", but "symmetry":
    symmetry example (A):

• if I had only 1 lens..... 50
• if I had only 2........  35+75
• if I had even 3..... 28+50+90
• how about 4..... 24+35+75+135

    symmetry example (B):

• if I had only 1 lens.....  35
• if I had only 2........   28+50
• if I had even 3.....  24+35+75
• how about 4.....  21+28+50+90

2. Now for asymmetry: whoever loves portraits would maybe love 75, 50+90 (or all 3).

3. More asymmetry: whoever loves architecture would maybe love 21, 21+28 (or all 3).

4. Tim, you put your finger on what I started off worrying about (before I ever discovered this forum). My Leica life started off asymmetrically as my choice of  No. 2 came after purchase of  No. 1, and No. 3 after No. 2 and so on. That's why my question in this posting arose in the first place and when anybody ever makes a new decision on 1-2-3 (mono-lenses, not a Tri-Lens) all on the same day, it's good (I think) to know who of us already likes what. Now if I could just have all 8.....


-- Michael Kastner (kastner@zedat.fu-berlin.de), October 23, 2001.

1. Portable variant I: a Summaron 28mm f5.6, an Elmar 50mm f3.5(or a Sonnar 50mm f2.0), a Russar 20mm f5.6, a SM Leica (weight about 2 pound);

2. Portable variant II: a Summicron 35mm f2.0, a Leica M4P (weight under 2 pound);

3. Portable variant III: a S.A. 21mm f3.4 & vfdr, a Summicron/Sonnar 50 mm f2.0,a Sonnar 135mm f4.0, a Leica M3 (weight under 3 pound)

Bag: Pockets & Neck

Meter: Sunny 16

-- Victor Randin (ved@enran.com.ua), October 23, 2001.

Michael - I hope this modest personal contributiion adds some thoughts consistent with the original aim of your posting: I chose 2/50 + 2/35 + 2.8/90, as for me they cover a subtle and excitingly disciplined range. For me they create that strange freedom which only boundaries seem to provide. (a bit like B&W images). In the past I have zoomed recklessly from 28 to 300 looking for creative compositions which would speed by in such quantity that I would be left floundering with sensory overload and not much to show for it. So I find images from a 50 alone demand such careful attention. A 35 then opens up dramatic new angles and proximity with the subject(s) and adding a 90 is another consentrated chapter of possibilities. 21s and 24s would tax me still further and I appreciate what others do with them. But for me, at present, it would be like having far too much icecream. These Leica lenses are just so extraordinarily rewarding. I really feel grateful to have such superb tools. - One man's opinion!

Cheers, Tim.

-- Tim Gee (twg@optushome.com.au), October 23, 2001.

Wow again! You guys are getting better all the time. It's again down to the basics and up to our creeds. It's even a paradox. Victor, thanks for demonstrating how we can get by with the simplest, even the least expensive and at the same time most invaluable treasures like our own neck, our pockets and the sun. Tim, thanks for explaining how a very expensive, long and heavy zoom to be twiddled with our left hand or of course with its own auto focus can be replaced just with a 50's or 35's use of our own two legs.

-- Michael Kastner (kastner@zedat.fu-berlin.de), October 23, 2001.