Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: > > On Tue, 13 Jan 2004, Keith Whaley wrote: > > > If they made it today, and advertised it for one of the top dog > > performers, you'd have to pay $500 and up for it.
> Why, is it that different to the $230-150 FA50/1.7? Gee, I don't know, Kostas. Is the FA offered today (I assume at that price, or you wouldn't have mentioned it,) the very same design as the M 50/1.7? I do wonder if it's optical performance can match the 1977 version's performance. Just because you meet the specs, doesn't mean you'll end up with the same product. What's $230-150? New vs. used price? Hmmm, I see it is, via Amazon.com. Well, I must admit, I was indeed taking a wild guess, and imagining what a top quality lens manufacturer might charge for such a very high performance lens. Not many maker's lens offerings can match that sort of performance, and as I see now, certainly not for the price! I am amazed! But then, I expect the prices are that low because the manufacturer has to put SOMEthing on the body when they sell it, and I'd guess the demand for top of the line, non-zoom, standard focal length lenses are pretty low on the priority list for most buyers! I'd guess the manufacture and assembly of that lens is almost totally automated by now, after over 25 years of refinement of the process, it has a mostly plastic body, and little if any post manufacturing attention to close fit. On the other hand, the M50mm/1.7 is all metal, feels very smooth, and has no doubt benefitted from hand fitting and careful assembly and adjustment, by skilled lens technicians. That M50 lens very likely cost $270+ when it first came out, and that was 26 years ago. If they made it today, the same way they did then, it would probably have more than doubled in price. But, that's speculation. They're NOT making it using labor-intensive methods. They've redesigned and tweaked assembly techniques so it's as cost effective a product as they can make, and they can still sell it for it's 1977 price! I doubt they're making more than a few shekels off each lens. Nevertheless, I feel it's an oustanding bargain in standard lenses today. Thanks for pointing out my gross error in judgement. Seriously. I've recalibrated my brain. . . keith whaley
