In article <51ktgn$aun@nuscc.nus.sg>, mpeongsk@leonis.nus.sg says...

>I am considering buying a standard lens, either the Nikkor 50mm 1.4D or
>the Nikkor 50mm 1.8, both AF. My camera body is a F90X. The first lens is
>a D-lens and thus suits my camera body. But, do I really need the
>D-feature at this focal length? The price for the second lens is only
>about 1/3 of the price of the first lens - and this is a factor that I am
>considering too. And, from lens tests in magazines and web pages, the
>second lens has been rated better than the first. I would greatly
>appreciate if anyone could share with me their experiences with these two
>lenses. Many thanks in advance.

I am the wrong one to ask about the "D" feature, since I don't like AF
or AE (and CERTAINLY not Matrix metering...;-), though TTL flash with
manually selectable fill-ratio is great. About the lenses, I do know
something. The 50mm f1.8 is a good lens, useable wide-open, and is
unusual for a normal lens in that it has no linear distortion. Being
fairly symmetrical and without distortion, and having reasonably
uniform performance across the frame at all apertures and focus
distances, it is suitable for virtually all uses you might put a
normal lens to. The 50mm f1.4 is higher in contrast over most of
the frame at the widest apertures, but optical performance is
worse in the corners than the f1.8 at wide apertures, and it is
not as suitable for close-up work. Both lenses are about equal
in level of quality, but are different in particulars, mostly
evident at wider apertures. Which you might prefer depends on
what you want to shoot with it - and the differences are
subtle - both are good lenses.
Hope This Helps