[Pablom]

I did not like the 50/1.7's bokeh; the 55mm f/1.8 Takumar was better in that regard (IMHO).

as I understand they both derive from the same formula, still prefer my 1.8/55 to the 1.7/50 any day. I both they take the best of all worlds, as the speed is really no different.

[Pablom]

Only problem for me is lack of QS. I own the fa 50/1.4 but would by the plasticky 50 if it brought QS .

2.4/35 doesn't have QS so I don't expect this one to have it. still it might.

[thibs]

2.4/35 doesn't have QS so I don't expect this one to have it. still it might.

Yeah that was exactly my point

[Class A]

I did not like the 50/1.7's bokeh; the 55mm f/1.8 Takumar was better in that regard (IMHO).

+1

I like the rendering and performance of lenses like the 55/1.8 or 85/2. Not sure whether it is has to do with the use of a relatively lower number of lens elements and the use of two relatively fat lens elements. All lenses with such a construction I know have a natural bokeh with more than good enough sharpness.

[eddie1960]

+1

I like the rendering and performance of lenses like the 55/1.8 or 85/2. Not sure whether it is has to do with the use of a relatively lower number of lens elements and the use of two relatively fat lens elements. All lenses with such a construction I know have a natural bokeh with more than good enough sharpness.

My 55 1.8 tak is my favourite 50/55 '(I have 7 at this point) there is something about the rendering and bokeh that just works for me. the 50 1.4 tak is no slouch but it just isn't as good to my eye (heck they are all pretty good even the soviet f3.5 pancake)

[1marek]

I did not like the 50/1.7's bokeh; the 55mm f/1.8 Takumar was better in that regard (IMHO).

I second that!
I got the Tak first and then I thought I'd compare the two, so I also acquired the 50/1.7. I tested a bit, compared the results and then put the 50/1.7 on the shelf. My dad now uses it, he likes it though (and that's probably just because I don't let him get anywhere near the Tak ).
If the reviews say the new 50/1.8 is more comparable to the Tak than to the 50/1.7, this lens goes straight to my buying A list!

[rparmar]

My 55 1.8 tak is my favourite 50/55 '(I have 7 at this point) there is something about the rendering and bokeh that just works for me. the 50 1.4 tak is no slouch but it just isn't as good to my eye (heck they are all pretty good even the soviet f3.5 pancake)

The Tak 55/1.8 is a pleasure to use and has a very nice "old school" rendering that is much like Leica, to my eye. But it is old fashioned and grainy, without the micro-contrast and cutting accuracy of more modern lens designs.

It would be very easy to justify owning three or four different 50mm lenses, based on their renderings. Lenses have personalities!

It's a shame we don't have the same choice in 28mm, although I do have something like a dozen off-brand models.