You have no way of knowing the history of any given individual lens. It may have been dropped, the elements can be knocked out of alignment even when there is no visible damage. It could have been serviced by a hack who put it back together wrong. You just have no way of knowing until you try that particular lens how it will perform.
In the experience of many an undamaged M50/1.4 is a rather great lens. Yes the newer model will likely have slightly better contrast due to the improved coatings, but other than that I do not believe anyone can actually tell the difference in normal photography.
As with any old lens it is best if you get either a no hassle return policy, or a very cheap price. At the price the original poster mentioned I would buy it unless it had obvious signs of damage.
--
Antonio Aparicio wrote:
I heard the A version was a slightly better performer and that the M version (as with other M lenses) was not the best in the lineup.
Antonio
On 13 May 2004, at 01:19, Andre Langevin wrote:
A 50/1.4 which, IIRC, has the same optical design as the M.
The M design has been modified to get to the A version.
The result? I don't know. The M had very low contrast at full aperture. The A may be better in that respect.
Andre
-- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com/graywolf.html
