Originally posted by butangmucat Thanks all. It is more about my questions on the relatively low user rating on this lens. I mean I have used it a few times, as a handy adapted walkaround glass on mirrorless, and it produces pictures as good as I would expect from a 50mm, but I don't quite get some the low ratings and recommend againsts in the database.
M50/2, Lens Turbo II, f5.6, wish the starbursts could be slightly more pronounced.
Most 50mm lenses are very good. Even a three element triplet can be remarkably good. The famous Tessar is a triplet of sorts with the last element made of two pieces glued together to help flatten the field, and the results from Tessars are excellent. The M50/f2 has five bits of glass because f2.8 is as big as a Tessar can handle. The M50/1.7 was too much for 5 elements, so a sixth was added. The f1.4 needs 7 lenses, but one should remember that every bit of glass impedes and reflects light from where you want it to go. Glass that isn't there has 100% transmission.
About the fungus in your lens, you may not be aware that fungus spoors are everywhere in the air, and will eventually enter lens-space. This is only a problem if you give them the conditions to grow - moisture and darkness for example. Yur lens is not likely to contaminate other lenses, and if it is in low humidity, growth will shut down completely. Some fungus, when it is active, produces an acid that eats into the glass. For aesthetic reasons I hate the idea of fungus in my lenses, but leave it to those more experienced to open the lens and clean it.