>> There do seem to be small (but not insignificant) optical improvements >> for the A (and, it would be assumed, the FA) over the M, but they are >> still fairly small differences. And, for some users, they might be >> small enough that the build quality and focus feel of the M over the A >> (and especially the FA) might be more significant.
> I wouldn't call them improvements - they are just slightly different. > Yes, you get more sharpness with the "A" version, but at the expense of > the bokeh. The M50/1.4 does have absolutely the best bokeh I've ever > seen. It's hard to judge from the web picture, anyway I've tried to > support my opinion: I do see what you're saying, Peter, and I also do (basically) agree (although my personal choice is slightly different). I do not think that Pentax has ever made a bad 50/1.4 (and this certainly was true back in the screwmount days, and it is still true in the era of "disappearing" FA 50/1.4's). My point is just that the differences between Pentax 50/1.4's may be quite subtle (and sometimes not so subtle - the need for AF, for example, is not a "subtle" need - <g>). So, you really like the M, while I really like the A (which also has very nice bokeh, in my opinion, is a wee bit sharper overall than the M, and has the 'A' contacts that make for simpler use on an eventual *ist DSLR), etc. I've owned a number of 50's over time, and I've settled on the A 50/1.4 (and the much less frequently used A 50/1.2) as my 50mm "keepers". (I've got a few 50/1.7's and 50/2's still kicking around, but that's only because I just haven't gotten rid of 'em.) (I also have a K 55/1.8, too, I guess.) Fred
