A sort of "lifestyle" article on Leica in today's NYTimes caught my eye with one particular paragraph: I'm no expert, but I've never heard or read anything else that espouses a relationship between flange distance and resolution, but there it is in black and white (or perhaps "monochrom" considering the subject of the article) in the New York Times. It seems that :43: has both "advantages" of the Leica design only more so. Given that the lens register of :43: is over 31% shorter than that of Leica M, I guess that we should expect a 31% gain in image crispness. All joking aside, is there any reason to expect there to be any advantage to having the lens mounted closer to the imaging plane or is this another case of a "tech" writer just making things up? I looked into this writer's bio and found some interesting qualifications including that he "helped design the first Britney Spears doll" and that he is "currently writing" a book which was published in 2010 -- pretty impressive résumé, I must admit.