How consistent is QC for the Nikon 50mm f/1.4D?

<p>I would like to buy one but reports seem to indicate that image quality varies from sample to sample by quite a lot. Is that true or are more of the reviews more subjective than objective?</p>

<p> </p>

<p>How on earth could anyone on here speak reliably or accurately about the Nikon QC procedures?</p>

<p>Most of these so-called 'horror stories' are internet myths and people who often have little idea of what they are talking about. Most photographers technical ability is not good enough to use any Nikon lens to its upmost anyway.</p>

<p>I find that the vast majority of the yammering you get from people who have just tried their first 50/1.8 (or ANY fast prime, made by Nikon, or Sigma, or anyone else) is a result of those people never having before used a lens that fast. They've been using kit lenses that are at f/5 or slower at 50mm, and haven't yet wrapped their brain around the fact that some uses of a wide open f/1.8 or f/1.4 lens means they have a quarter of an inch of workable depth of field.<br /><br />People seem strangely anxious to blame the lens manufacturers for something that is really the fault of that cruel mistress, the Laws of Physics.<br /><br />On which camera will you be using the lens?</p>

<p>Mr. Moseley,</p>

<p>Thanks for your input. I figure someone who works for Nikon or has a lot of hands on experience testing lenses might have an idea how consistent Nikon's QC is.<br /> .<br /> .<br /> Mr. Laur,</p>

<p>Thanks. Good points. I am sure that has a lot to do with it.</p>

<p>I will be using the 50mm f/1.4 on a D700, D50 and occasionally on a FG.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>The 50mm f/1.4 is brilliant on a D700. I agree with Matt Laur...most of the complaints about "sample variation" are really user error.</p>

<p>I doubt you'll ever hear a current employee of any manufacturer discussing quality control or other sensitive issues on a public forum like this, at least not if he or she wants to keep that job.</p>

<p>Even if they aren't bound by non-disclosure agreements, commenting publicly on a business for which you work is extremely touchy and best left to professionals trained in the art of public relations. I've seen untrained PR attempts backfire when employees of small U.S. manufacturers and service companies (in both the photo and radio industries) participated on discussion forums. Their posts invariably went from initially informative to defensive and even hostile when they were provoked by accusations of spamming, or accused of being personally responsible for the woes of some unhappy customer or client.</p>

<p>You *might* get somewhat informed opinions from folks who've actually worked in camera shops or from repair techs, but even those will be opinions based on limited sampling groups.</p>

<p>The main problem with quality control in photography exists immediately behind the viewfinder.</p>

<p>"The main problem with quality control in photography exists immediately behind the viewfinder."</p>

<p>Indeed.</p>

<p>"The main problem with quality control in photography exists immediately behind the viewfinder"</p>

<p>+1 ...very, very well said that man...</p>