>>4397772
Stupid. Too big for a 50mm. Canon had an AF f/1 50mm like 30 years ago for a flange distance double Z mount and it was about half that big. Probably better IQ too lol

>>4397772
Now thats a true photographers tool right there. Not some Playstation toy.

>>4397832
lightweight bibi <3

>>4397772
Soulless and flat rendering. Even the $150 sony 50mm f1.8 is better.

This isnt a photographers tool. Its NASA equipment for scanning the surface of the moon.

Have you taken any photos with it, OP?

>>4397772
The noct is a meme, get the plena

>>4398210
plena is a meme and overpriced. get the samyang

>>4398210
>>4398315
oh and forgot. it's also oversized, overweight, and overelemented

>>4398315
Viltrox lab better

>>4398321
>Viltrox lab
lol

>>4398338
>>4398316
yes, because specs on paper are what matter
not what kind of images the lens actually yields

>>4398342
I mean, they do have a point. Size and weight can be important factors.

>>4398344
if you're a faggot with aids
>ohhh nooo two pounds
>after the camera, my cuck cage, and my zoom m3 thats a whole FOUR pounds
>my arms are going to crumble
Holy fucking shit, you people would be hospitalized halfway through basic if you joined the army. There is no fucking way you can steady a rifle while standing without ideal competition posture with how weak most of you claim to be. You express your concerns in GRAMS. You are that weak.
>100g, a massive amount of weight - weak faggots
You are aware that healthy men have a natural amount of muscle without exercising correct

>>4398350
? this board is faggots and women, yourself included

>>4397832
85mm DS is my favorite lens right now

>>4398344
When was the last time you were shooting and thought "wow gee I sure which my lens would be 500grams lighter!!"

>>4398373
I would not buy it in the first place.

>>4398377
so never

>>4398373
What do you mean you don't want to fuck yourself with a cactus? When was the last time you were masturbating and thought "wow gee I sure wish I didn't use cactus as my dildo!!"

>>4398382
you're quite a ways away from /trash/, anon kun

>>4398385
just get a slave to carry all your equipment for you

>>4398382
>>4398385
>Sois seething this hard over a little weight
oooooh noooooooooo
100 grams. what is that in man units? yes
0.1kg.

>numale: 100g? thats enormous. ounces are pounds and pounds are pain. muscles? no thats sexism and white supremacy, male strength is institutionalized rape culture. as a responsible man i admit my sex is disproportionately criminal due to unfair access to weapons and muscles that women and transwomyn POCs do not get to have.
>man: 0.1kg? big deal. ounces are pounds and pounds are pain... is what i say when i'm packing 50 of something!

For the record, the lens in OP weights 2kg and is manual focus only.

>>4398435
2kg is literally nothing. Skinny japanese girls handhold 2kg lenses.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	800
Image Height	500
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>whining over 2 pounds
Try 20 you plebs

It's one thing to not want heavy equipment if you're specifically looking for a lightweight setup, but otherwise you just come across like Chris-Chan being asked to pull weeds.

>>4398482
One can be not specifically focused on lightweight setup and also not want to lug around very front heavy 3kg camera.
But I agree that 0.9kg isn't too bad for a lens. The thing is, size and shape alone can make a lens inconvenient for carrying around on a shoulder strap.

>>4398431
Why would you carry anything extra at all when you dont have to? Silly boomer

>>4397870
I took a few in my office when I unboxed it. Unbelievable sharpness. Can't wait to take it out this weekend.

>>4398520
Why do you even notice these minute amounts of weight? The only important ergonomic feature is strap balance. The camera should either be flat as possible or strapped so it points down. That’s it, just use a comfy strap cross body and you’re done.

>>4398553
because they will never afford a lens of that grade and can only play imagination by comparing spec sheets

>>4398554
What are you talking about, there's plenty of good, very affordable DLSR glass around 1kg.

>>4398574
Which do you use?

>>4397772
Yes but has anyone ever been far as decided to use? Until I see some ackshual images from one of these I refuse to believe it really exists.

Cunts.

>>4398602
The biggest one I use is the 180 f/2.8, which is around 750g, but the various 80-200 f/2.8 and 300 f/4 are north of 1200g and the still relatively affordable 300 f/2.8 is almost 3kg.

>>4398350
mountain climbers also stress over mere ounces because the issue isn't picking up the equipment one time or holding for 2 minutes you fucking moron

>>4398675
But because they are carrying 100 pieces of equipment and 100x2oz extra per is a lot when you’re climbing a mountain

You on the other hand are a homosexual doing day hikes

>>4397772
>Normal sane person wants to carry less shit everyday
>/p/ autist wants to carry heavier lenses and wants people to know they work out at the gym and is a manly man
lmao wut

>>4398705
>normal sane person
Minomalist edc brahs and ultralight backpackers from reddit are not normal sane people

>>4398705
if your excuse for 100grams of weight difference is cause you "can't carry it" you should see a doctor

>>4398723
He compares himself to a mountain climber managing the weight of 100+ items for a 10 mile journey to the summit.

Mind you such people use 1” PNS at the largest.

>>4398723
>100grams of weight difference
Don't be a disingenuous dipshit, the OP lens is 1500g more than a normal 50.

>>4398822
he clearly wasn't referring to the OP lens you dipshit XL

>>4398480
I absolutely must see a .dng that falls out of that mad contraption.

>>4398857
There have been no comparisons made in this thread of a 100g difference, I don't know where he got that number that he keeps spouting.

>>4398863
if i were to guess, prob here >>4398316

only problem is it's not exactly 100 grams and they're for 2 completely different mounts

>>4398480
holy chadola

>>4398869
>only problem is it's not exactly 100 grams
Correct, it's 223g. To put it into perspective that's more than most 50mm f/1.8's, it's like having a whole other prime lens taped to your 135mm.
>and they're for 2 completely different mounts
I think the point he was trying to make is just that Nikon's lenses are fat

>>4398901
Honestly big L on Nikon's part for going with a larger mount.

>>4399074
The Z mounts dia is great, it’s the shallow offset that stinks. Ensures every lens is fucking huge and there can be no pancakes. All bc they wanted to pack a pile of cooling bullshit in around the sensor.

>>4398480
The cat's face is fucking killing me. I'd love to see an image from that monster.
>>4398350
The overlap with /k/ and /p/ is extremely minimal my man, these guys would pop a vein on the weight of my PRS rigs or even my hunting rig lmfao.
Half these faggots choose their camera solely on fashion.
>oh this lens is just oh so heavyyyyy for my 2 mile walk to shoot buildings
you can tell they've never carried out a quartered deer for a few miles or do any hiking lmfao.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	DxO PhotoLab 7.6
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2025:01:16 09:11:53
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	3882
Image Height	1586

>>4398435
I tried it in the Xintiandi shop, and it's not too bad to handle IRL.

>>4399080
The diameter is totally useless except for the 2 optics nerds who get boners when you say "It doesn’t focus breathe because it’s image space telecentric".

>cooling shit
What? They overheat as fast as snoys.

>>4398705
it depends on what you are doing. I don't mind my 120 slr being heavy because I am carrying it with the intent of taking pics and it isn't that fucking heavy. on the other hand, I like the 20mm pancake lens on my m43 (and M43 in general) because its more convenient if I want to pocket it

>>4399821
Fashion - i dont blame people, getting laid matters.
Packing more important stuff than an MTF chart, i don’t blame people. Minus some sharpness plus a spare meal or some spare clothes is a good trade.

But usually they dont actually give a fuck about that, 100g is actually heavy to them

>>4399874
>Fashion - i dont blame people, getting laid matters.
I'd wager there's been less than 10 instances of a chick going "Oh wow is that a L/GM lens? Wanna bang?" in the past 40 years. That's like saying gun bunnies would bang you for having a radian/LMT/Noveske rifle lmfao, but I do understand looks can play a factor.
For me I'm buying a camera to take photos, I care about ergonomics, sensor, and capabilities and probably looks last.
Probably why I chose the gigablob r6mkii, it's comfy as fuck to hold with telephotos.

>But usually they dont actually give a fuck about that, 100g is actually heavy to them
This always cracks me up as they get obscenely defensive if you even hint at touching a barbell lmfao. Like you should be lifting already man, why are you getting mad.

>>4399883
>women caring about models/prices
they do not know or care. it would be like women caring about your 1rm bench instead of looks.

women care if your camera looks sleek and cool, or if it's a huge "city park pedophile" blob. they have no clue about what it is expensive or legendary. women are the ones buying all the fuji crap and leaving it in their purse. their exposure to cameras amounts to a few movies where serial killers and perverts used DSLRs and seeing christian bale use a leica (that they thought was a fujifilm) and taylor swift use an e-m10 (that they thought was a fujifilm). many girls flat out call DSLRs "dexter cameras" and if you tape over the branding on a sony it becomes a fujifilm.

>>4399891
>girls who pay attention to christian bale and taylor swift and keep dusty fuji digishits in their purses because tiktok said to
mmmm, 30 year old pussy

>>4399891
Brb buying a d2x to let the 35 year old boomerettes know I’m a serial pussy slayer

>>4399821
>>4399874
Ya'll are missing the point. No one is saying that an extra 100g is too heavy (the closest comparison made in this thread was actually about 220g but whatever), they're saying that a lens is needlessly heavy. Yes your very manly rifle is much heavy in comparison and I'm sure it makes you feel like a big burly man when you carry it around, but you'd be lying if you said you wouldn't take one that was otherwise identical in performance but was half a kilo lighter.

>>4399907
>your very manly rifle is much heavy OwO
>i'm sure it makes you feel like a big burly man when you carry it around~ ;3
Enough flirting, miss. Can you name a 50mm f0.95 that is lighter without a dramatic compromise in resolution and aberrations?
(protip: you can't)

>>4399913
No one gives a shit about the Noct, no one is buying it, and no one was making a comparison to it

>>4399907
>but you'd be lying if you said you wouldn't take one that was otherwise identical in performance but was half a kilo lighter.
its a race gun. they are intentionally heavy because you don't really carry them anywhere and the weight absorbs recoil and deals with heat better

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	OLYMPUS CORPORATION
Camera Model	PEN-F
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 12.2.1 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.7
Color Filter Array Pattern	766
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	40 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2023:04:13 17:18:56
Exposure Time	1/250 sec
F-Number	f/4.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	200
Lens Aperture	f/4.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	20.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Custom
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	High Gain Up
Contrast	Hard
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>4400002
Then in that case it wouldn't be identical in performance. That doesn't really apply to cameras, there are very few situations where heavier is better. Also nice job bragging about being big and strong when you don't actually carry the rifle around, really relevant to the discussion.

>>4399867
The lack of focus breathing is great.

>>4400016
The sad part is so many of their lenses do still breathe. Meanwhile sony corrected it digitally and no one cared about the crop.

>>4399921
Ooh catty arent ya lass

>>4397772
...st

>entire thread posting about weight
This is clearly a lens for astrophotographers ONLY. That understanding makes all of these discussions meaningless at best and utterly retarded at worst.
It has no AF, is clearly designed to be used only on a tripod, renders flat as a board, and is supposedly sharp wide open.
If you want to use this lens for anything but astro, you are an absolute moron.

>>4400107
"Flat rendering" isnt real. Its light, handholdable, and good for portraits.

>>4400111
Yeah thats you when you bring up euro lens paypig myths like 3d pop and flat rendering lol!

>>4399891
>many girls flat out call DSLRs "dexter cameras"

i have never heard this and my gf is 26 and graduated from art school. the worst i heard is looking like a hipster or a photography major which is a insult in its own vs other art majors apparently. >>4400054 is me btw and i look fucking schizo irl

most girls just take iphone pictures desu its good enough and easy to share, i personally like dslrs because they're fun to shoot and feel like a camera.

>>4400123
It sounds like a high school in joke desu

30 year old boomers will do shit like think everyone watched some obscure cartoon on cable and had a neo-pet and certain video games because that was what everyone in their suburban town did.

>>4398869
>they're for 2 completely different mounts
weren't nikonboys crowing about how their mount is so great since everything adapts to it? you can buy your chinese magadap adapter and the samyang lens and still come in way under the Plena's weight, price, and size, with an insignificant penalty to image quality (no you aren't going to be able to tell the difference between the images). At least with the Sony/Canon 135mm options there are actual advantages to the 1st party options (faster linear AF motor or IS) but the Nikon has neither and is still using a shoddy STM AF motor just like the Samyang.

>>4400215
Maybe if nikon would remove their non compete clause from Z mount licensing, niggors wouldn't have this problem

FYI: That clause is why tamron lenses keep coming out with weird zoom ranges and prime focal lengths. They can't do the same thing as a nikon product if they want to sell to nikon... and keep making half of nikon's lenses for them, of course. An unknown number of nikon lenses are made by tamron. It might actually be all of them. They have a japan factory so you'd never know by MIJ!

>>4400235
If the Plena was made by Tamron, it would at least have a linear AF motor (VXD) and not STM. God how is Nikon so behind on AF.

>>4400282
To keep people buying bodies expecting an upgrade

meanwhile canon and sony are ridiculous. You could buy an a7iv/a7rv or r6ii/r5 and just never upgrade until the 2040s when global shutter medium format becomes standard or society collapses. We have reached the generational cost/benefit peak of mirrorless. Maybe global shutter will proliferate a bit, but its just not all that useful for 99% of people. Its all trickling out bullshit video features no one needs and nonsense like sportscar detect AF tuned to ignore safety cars from here on out. Maybe consoomers will be fooled by quarterback detect AF and jersey number priority. These will happen. Actual image quality and utility for competent operators will remain the same. Screenshot it.