I'm not totally convinced by the anti-M arguments.
First, a great many M lenses were identical optically to either the preceding K lens, or to the following A lens, so I don't think that in those (many) cases anybody can credibly claim that the Ks or As were better.
I agree. If you look at the optical formulae on Boz's site, it's apparent that the majority of M lenses have the same optics as either the preceeding K lenses or the succeeding A lenses. After you factor out the lenses that were truly unique - like the 40 f2.8 and 150 f2.8 - there are only a handful of M lenses that have distinct optical designs and that can be compared to the K's or A's,
Fifth, I don't think Cartier-Bresson ever used an SLR, but if he were to, I'd bet it would be an M camera with an M lens. And to my taste, CB beats pictorialists like AA hands down.
I have a Canon T90 here, and I can imagine Catier-Bresson using it.
Assume that CB likes walnuts, of course... :-0
- MCC
-----
Mark Cassino Photography
Kalamazoo, MI
http://www.markcassino.com
-----
