[none]

[Peterson_Art@hq.navsea.navy.mil]

     Recent discussion about the use of high-speed wide-angle lenses brings 
     to mind something I've wondered about for years.  The designs of large 
     aperture lenses generally seem to involve large expanses of glass, all 
     other things being equal (e.g., the Noctilux), which stands to reason, 
     at least from my layman's viewpoint.  Conversely, in each photographic 
     format, the designs of moderate wide-angle lenses generally would seem 
     to permit the minimization of lens size (e.g., for 35mm Leica M series 
     cameras, the extremely small size of the pre-aspherical 35mm Summicron 
     and Summilux lenses and the 40mm Summicron-C).  Therefore, based on an 
     assumption that no one would want to tote around a huge chunk of glass 
     and metal (e.g., the Noctilux) if it weren't necessary, then why is it 
     that when lens makers design higher speed lenses (going from f/1.4, to 
     f/1.2, and ultimately to f/1), all of them (e.g., Leica, Nikon, Canon, 
     Minolta, Olympus, and the rest) do it in the 50mm-to-58mm focal length 
     range rather than, say, the 35mm-to-40mm focal length range?  With any 
     given maximum aperture, is not a 35mm lens smaller and more convenient 
     that a 50mm or 58mm lens for the same camera, and so would not a small 
     (relatively) and convenient 35mm f/1 Noctilux M lens be far preferable 
     to a larger, heavier, and more conspicuous 50mm f/1 Noctilux?  And yet 
     none exists (or as far as I have ascertained, has ever existed)---why?