On 21 Jan 2003 18:38:30 -0800, brianc1959@aol.com (brian) wrote:

>This was a surprise to me. Bjorn Rorslett alerted me to the

>possibility that there might be a significant difference between these

>two lenses, and sure enough, its true. I located one of the older

>lenses to test against my newer version. The test scene was very

>exciting: a blank painted wall. The older version has no trace of

>the bright central flare spot that plagues the newer version when used

>as small stops: http://caldwellphotographic.com/50oldnew.jpg

>

>I've heard reports that the autofocus versions also suffer from the

>bright spot, but I can't yet confirm this.

>

>Brian

>www.caldwellphotographic.com

See www.David-Ruether-Photography.com/slemn.html.

There are only two 50mm f1.8 versions listed, since

I only list *optical types*, not barrel variations...

The older version, BTW, is generally a tad better in

the corners wide-open, and it shows some barrel

distortion, unlike the newer version... The newer

design, for those into barrel types, appeared in

two versions of the E, two versions of the MF AIS

(one with plastic, one with all-metal barrel parts),

and three versions of the AF (small focus-ring,

rubber-ring, and "D"); the E were single-coated; the

others multi-coated; the older version appeared in

two forms, the AI, and the AIS. Do you see why I don't

bother with listing all the barrel types? ;-).