Yes in fact they are. Canons upcoming 1.4 will probably be priced at thrice that.

Are you going to add this to your Zf paperweight collection?

How often do you shoot at f/1.4?

File: DSC_6103.jpg (2.04 MB, 2012x3024)

2.04 MB JPG

>>4358429
all the time?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON Z 6_2
Camera Software	Capture One 23 Macintosh
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	50 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Exposure Time	1/640 sec
F-Number	f/1.4
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/1.4
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Subject Distance	1.20 m
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	50.00 mm
Image Width	2012
Image Height	3024
Rendering	Custom
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	None
Contrast	Hard
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Soft
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>10 elements in 7 groups
hopefully its gonna have some 3d pop, not really looking that great tho.
anyway - why dont they make an actual compact lens - look at the "old" nikon 50 1.4d for example.
us mirrorless folk are just getting fucked, why are the lenses so long, the 28/2.8se or 40/2se were just the right size...

>>4358439
Is if really worth it compared to a f/1.8 that is less than half the price?

>>4358454
that nikkor 1.8 line up is great

>>4358454
The new 50/1.4 is cheaper than the 50/1.8 S.

>>4358465
Because it's soft like your peepee

>>4358466
gottem

File: sony-fe-50mm-f25-g.jpg (351 KB, 1600x900)

351 KB JPG

>>4358422
>mogs you

Shame I have the 40 f/2. Im sure this is more sharp but it doesn't add anything to my kit like other lenses would...unless it's just that fantastic. Only z lens I have so far.

>>4358422
Their f1.8 version is so incredibly good that I don't see a reason to get this f1.4 lens.

>>4358473
>f2.5
mogs nothing. that's m4/3 level

>>4358474
I'd buy a small/cheap 35mm ... but for 50mm I'd always go to the 1.8S
the 35mm 1.8S is too shit for the price and it's too big to be this shit

File: grg6ZCo.png (609 KB, 640x800)

609 KB PNG

>>4358422
As a Canoncuck I kneel before the Nikonchads and their superior value lenses.

>>4358422
>425g
>88mm long
Not a big deal but I'd call it medium sized. That doesn't count as compact and lightweight anymore. Mirrorless lenses can be a lot smaller.

>>4358422
>$600 for a giant soft f1.4
Maybe they should focus on why their 50mm f1.8 is the size of sony’s 50mm f1.4 gm - ditto for the optically junk 35.

I can see why people are keeping their d850s except for some extreme pixel peepers and sois.

>>4358477
M4/3 be like
F4(F8)
Iso 200 (basec, ISO 800)
1/1000
But if you took a closeup of your cat in your bedroom fool frame would be jussasbaaaad unless you had slightly more if their ears out of focus reeeeee!

File: IMG_0362.jpg (172 KB, 1000x788)

172 KB JPG

>>4358481
ancient cheap rf lenses are superior to this new scamglass lol
>mirrorless! smaller sharper!
>same performance as a dslr lens
>bigger
>heavier

[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	1000
Image Height	788
Scene Capture Type	Standard

In case you /p/eople can't notice this, Nikon is pulling a hard J turn with their tires screeching and speeding off into being a video-centric brand like panasonic.
>THE Z8/Z9/Z6III DONT HAVE LE DYNAMIC RANGE
It doesn't matter for something where people view most often blurred 8mp frames for less than 1/24th of a second, sitting 15 feet away from the screen.
>THE LENS MTF CHART IS NOT ANY BETTER THAN THIS $100 DSLR SHITTER
But the autofocus runs smoother, it has less focusing breathing, and they seem to be focusing hard on bokeh quality. Because sharpness isn't even noticeable in video.
>THE CONTROL RING IS STUPID NO CLICKS
No clicks is how VIDEO aperture rings are set up, however.
>ITS BIG! AS BIG AS DSLR!
But close to the same size as most other primes and some of the zooms which means it's less work rebalancing gimbals.

Nikon gave you the ZF and 26 f2.8 (a lens that is unusable for video and renders like a classic PNS lens) as what may turn out to be their last photo-centric release besides a potential megapixel overkill z7ii. Because they just bought red.

Nikon is constantly making statements about how video drives all their sales. They're the new panasonic.

>>4358422
I bought an F mount 50mm f1.4 yesterday for only 100 usd.
God, I love the Z mount (and all the rich boomers who flock to it).

>>4358516
Based Fchad

>>4358516
>finally the autofocus is as good as my d750 sayeth the dentist
>*buys a $2500 z6iii and a bunch of lenses that cost 5x more*

>>4358523
>>4358518
I hope Nikon finally drops support for D850 soon.
It's still ridiculously expensive secondhand.

>>4358516
Aren't FTZ adapters a thing?

>>4358539
Then its going to get even more expensive because it is unironically better than the z7, z7ii, and for most people who aren't big FPS/video buffs and hyper-dependent on subject detect autofocus, the z8 and z9.

>>4358543
FTZ doesn't support most of F mount (AF-D).

For reference:
EF-RF fully supports 100% of EF
Sony bodies from the a7riv on have 100% support for autofocus and lens electronics on all of minolta A mount

>>4358546
So it only works for lenses with integrated AF drives? Does it still allow metering?

File: 50mm-1.jpg (132 KB, 799x533)

132 KB JPG

>>4358422
>Compact
Lol, lmao even.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM
Camera Model	X-E1
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.0 (Macintosh)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	51 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2013:08:21 15:07:55
Exposure Time	1/40 sec
F-Number	f/4.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	800
Lens Aperture	f/4.0
Brightness	3 EV
Exposure Bias	1.7 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	34.30 mm
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>4358439
Why doesn't this photo have better image quality than m43? This camera costs like 5x as much. Why would you buy this?

>>4358550
he adds fake grain to everything and uses the cheapest nikon 50mm because he went broke going through like 3 different m43 setups lol

technically it does have better IQ than m43 in many ways but you'd need a better photographer like doghair, huskychad, or sugar to see it

File: heavy-tf2.gif (3.33 MB, 640x360)

3.33 MB GIF

>>4358551
>or sugar
Bahahahahahaha yuo are funny guy

>>4358550
most lenses will be at their sharpest at middle apertures

>>4358439
What message does this image convey?

Ah yes the evening yuropoor debate thread.

>>4358551
Is this the dude who bought the PEN-F and couldn't hit focus with a modern autofocus camera?

>>4358556
If my memory serves me right
>pen f
>panasonix gx-something?
>om-5
Also complaining about autofocus, and using a nikon z6-ii, which has notoriously bad autofocus with shitty subject detect and worse speed/accuracy in limited areas than the d750

>>4358561
That's rough. It's honestly pretty hard to take a bad picture with a gx85, every time I see a picture from that specific camera it always has such a nice rendering to it. Like a really fine grain with no chroma noise. Even the dpreview samples look pretty good.

>>4358562
All the grain BS is just how people edit their photos and avoid certain shooting situations AKA a skill issue

The autofocus on it is a legitimate limitation. You need to prefocus in AF-S for fast action and rely on apertures f5.6+ (f11 equivalent) to have fudging room. If you aren't tracking the subject already and it's a genuine candid moment you'll miss a lot. But it's a $400 compact camera, and the next body that's just better all around while being close to the same size is a $1000 sony a7c.

It's also definitely not better or worse than a lol-m 5.

>>4358564
> autofocus on it is a legitimate limitation
skill issues

>>4358567
Professionals are constantly clamoring for better autofocus
Hobbiysts who couldn't get a job in photography if they tried insist that the "autofocus" on a fuji xt1 is good enough and its a "skill issue"

One of these groups is realistic about getting the shot whenever they see it, the other group is internet tryhards that play games with themselves trying to track bicyclists and racecars whenever they're shooting things other than hillsides and building corners
>uh mr pro, you did it wrong, you should have learned to track with manual focus and pre-focus and and and-
>buddy i just switched from the cornerback to the quarterback while they were running at full speed i dont have time for your shit

>>4358567
>explains the specific skill needed to cope with shit technology on a budget camera
>SKILL ISSUE!!!!!!
NPCs

File: AA-moonrise-768x768-1.jpg (90 KB, 768x768)

90 KB JPG

>>4358568
So... skill issues?

>>4358570
Its called, shooting a 35mm equivalent, set it at f8 and be there :)

>>4358564
>>4358568
>NO!!! my inability to hit focus on modern cameras with near instant focus and perfect tracking is actually because im so good and smart!!!
just give up man, go try a different hobby, its obviously so over for you.

>>4358571
Posting the man who thought he couldn't take a nice photo of a rock without a big ass 4x5 and still coped his way down to hasselblads and contaxes for portraiture because focusing took too long on it?

>SKILL ISSUE SKILL ISSUE STOP HAVING NICE THINGS!
Technology limits your content. This is a fact of photography unless you can see the future and train your brain to do distance calculations as well as a computer. Also, you're a nophoto.

>>4358576
>Near instant focus - on one spot with no tracking
>vs every GOOD camera made since 2005: constant instant near-perfect tracking autofocus
Yes, you have to prefocus and use deep DOF to cope with the fact that you'll probably miss otherwise

Or you could fast forward to the high technology of 1995 and just point and click and worry about composition, content, light, and color instead of reaction times like...
Literally everyone else, including every single award winning photographer who didn't go the "zone focus <50mm" route instead.

Also, you're nophoto. You're an internet tough guy who thinks his hylic computer-brain skills like leveling horizons without an onscreen level and "reaction times" are worth enough to make him good despite his total lack of composition, content, light, color, compelling stories, and emotion.

>>4358578
its europoors who wanted to get into shooting guns but couldn't
>but muh aim
>muh precision
>muh reaction times
>if i was allowed to own a gun i would be the best

>>4358578
>yap yap yap
Hold the autofocus button down until your subject is in focus. What's so hard about that?

File: 58c7fdf8ca850.image.jpg (118 KB, 1200x630)

118 KB JPG

>>4358581
I know, nophoto, you have never used a micro four thirds, especially not a CDAF only body, so you don't know what I'm talking about. Why would you, I'm talking about the technique behind photographing with shitty gear and you don't take photos. You're an internet tough guy who larps about shooting high speed runway fashion-acrobatics with a pentax k1000.
>Hold the autofocus button down until your subject is in focus.
This is how DSLR AF works. It constantly focuses on the subject as long as it's in the autofocus area. This is not how autofocus works on a GX85. The GX85 is only competent in AF-S, so to shoot action you need to track, prefocus, recompose (delay here from the focus pulse and shutter delay) and shoot. This is great for cars, bikes, and more predictable things if you are working zoomed out or with deep DOF.

Now you know how to focus with a GX85.

It sounds easy but it absolutely can not catch unpredictable movement as reliably as a better camera like basically any canon DSLR since the original 5d, which is actually why we're still not seeing a lot of micro four thirds use in sports photography. Too many CDAF bodies or bodies with really shitty PDAF implementations. When you can one day see the future and move the focus ring as fast and precisely as a computer, then you will be able to shoot as well as the many people who went to the paris olympics with decade old DSLRs.

File: P1050681.jpg (1.67 MB, 2248x3341)

1.67 MB JPG

>>4358588
>calls everyone a nophoto
>post no photo herself
Straight to my cringe folder

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Panasonic
Camera Model	DMC-GF5
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 8.2.1 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.7
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	54 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2024:07:19 20:51:03
Exposure Time	1/60 sec
F-Number	f/22.0
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	160
Lens Aperture	f/22.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Flash
Flash	Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	25.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	Low Gain Up
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>4358589
>Fumo snapper
Worse than a nophoto. An incelphoto.

>>4358589
>autistic anime troon afraid of people cant comprehend a post on the specifics of taking in-focus photos of people doing chad things like playing sports
shocker!

>>4358588
No one is reading that.

>>4358588
>nophoto schizo yap rant

>>4358592
>>4358593
here comes the samefag seethe

lmao anime is for faggot incels

>>4358590
>>4358591
Samefag
>Verification not required.

>>4358595
Nope im just >>4358591 now go back to photographing your stuffed little girls doll kek

I was talking about photography for real men and women not indoor camera masturbation for troons

File: 20231021_0145_01.jpg (1.4 MB, 2312x3383)

1.4 MB JPG

>>4358590
>>4358591
>>4358594
>>4358597
seething

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Panasonic
Camera Model	DMC-G6
Camera Software	darktable 4.8.0
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/5.3
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	54 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Created	2024:09:10 13:04:30
Exposure Time	1/200 sec
F-Number	f/8.0
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	160
Exposure Bias	-0.3 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Fine Weather
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	27.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	2312
Image Height	3383
Exposure Mode	Auto
Image Quality	Unknown
White Balance	Daylight
Focus Mode	Unknown
Spot Mode	Unknown
Image Stabilizer	Unknown
Macro Mode	Normal
Shooting Mode	Program
Audio	No
Flash Bias	0.00 EV

>>4358554
More bokeh gooder

>>4358597
>REAL MEN CAN'T FOCUS!! NO MATTER WHAT!!!
lmao wtf r u deadass retarded

>>4358604
Real men (and biological women) shoot things for chads like sports, where the action is so fast paced and unpredictable it's clear that micro four thirds is a massive autofocus downgrade from a canon 5d. You could focus, but all your photos would be excessive DOF snapshits and you'd miss a lot of epic sports moments since those usually involve rapid changes of direction.

Panny trannies top out at plush dolls and blurry mexicans walking down the street because sports are scary toxic masculinity.

>>4358422
AI killed photography so it doesn't matter. Anyone who hasn't produced a well documented portfolio before 2016 can't be trusted as a photographer. Sell your gear, kid.

>>4358422
>compact and ligntweight
>lens alone is the size of a whole camera

>>4358606
I wish you were a tripfag so we could all laugh and remind you of this moment from now on. This is so unbelievably embarrassing.

File: _1227715.jpg (1.26 MB, 1799x2400)

1.26 MB JPG

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Panasonic
Camera Model	DC-GH5M2
Camera Software	darktable 4.8.0
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/5.2
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	70 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Created	2024:08:10 11:43:13
White Point Chromaticity	0.3
Exposure Time	1/2500 sec
F-Number	f/10.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	800
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Spot
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	35.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1799
Image Height	2400
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	High Gain Up
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Image Quality	Unknown
White Balance	Auto
Focus Mode	Auto
Spot Mode	Unknown
Image Stabilizer	Unknown
Macro Mode	Normal
Shooting Mode	Manual
Audio	No
Flash Bias	1.00 EV

File: before and after switchin(...).jpg (168 KB, 1400x994)

168 KB JPG

>>4358626
Sorry kiddo, truth hurts

Maybe once you get your full frame canon you'll put on some muscle and enjoy sports yourself

>>4358629
Not a lick of bokeh, not even a real sport like football, and it looks like it came from a canon powershot at only ISO 800. Shame.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Photographer	Jared Polin
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Width	1400
Image Height	994

File: e4c08a8352a760029b69b27d6(...).jpg (102 KB, 944x640)

102 KB JPG

>>4358637
>sports photography
>bokeh
keep digging that hole

>>4358641
look at that shitbox go!

>>4358641
Sports photography is all about bokeh, boomer. No one wants to see the audience.

notice how the little contrarian has no example to show

File: canon-pro-tom-jenkins-spo(...).jpg (110 KB, 1200x771)

110 KB JPG

>>4358645
>contrarian
>t. brainless bokeh hater mad that he cant afford a canon

File: 17193381876319.jpg (99 KB, 828x552)

99 KB JPG

>>4358647
that just happens because of the distance of said event
The cameraman gives no fucks about how blurry or defined the audience is

>>4358647
>posts photo taken on m43
shit writes itself lmao

>>4358650
He could have zoomed out and shot at f22 and said something about equivalence

But he didnt

>>4358653
Sports photography isn't the right place to get autismal about aperture, it's the realm of shutter speed

>>4358429
f1.4 lenses is for shooting sharp f1.8 photos, which you can't really do with f1.8 lenses.

>>4358422
nikons design language is so ugly

>>4358666
Still better than SNOY toys

>>4358675
another nikon user seething hard because hes flat broke after being irrationally angry at sony over FUD

dont forget to buy an om5 because your nikon is too fucking big to take outside

>>4358676
Are you okay, bro?

>>4358662
The 50 1.8 S is super sharp at 1.8. I'm not sure who this 1.4 is for, but it's nice that people have options.

>>4358719
Nikon really fucked up when they made f/1.8 the 'pro' model and f/1.4 the entry level model

>>4358422
Ugh. I want a proper 24 pancake. Fast. Metal. Weathersealed. Normal threaded flush mount filter ring instead of that 26mm bayonet horseshit. No extra material protruding beyond the glass.

50mm is for furfags.

File: Screenshot 2024-09-10 205620.png (1.58 MB, 1521x1013)

1.58 MB PNG

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sqrP_5QBj6c

this guy took some nice photos with the lens

rinko kawauchi style with the blue /green editing

File: 8n.jpg (127 KB, 1059x895)

127 KB JPG

>>4358756
at least you guys get pancakes :(

File: 1711360206145399.png (61 KB, 863x562)

61 KB PNG

>>4358762
Man, how did Sony overtake Nikon when they don't make a single pancake?

>>4358764
Because Nikon took their sweet ass time tinkering in their workshop for years while Sony was busy out there selling the shit out of mirrorless cams like hotcakes. Nikon was what, dead last to finally get their ML on the market, and took 3 years to retool the entire lens line. Plebbit was predicting Nikon going out of business (sort of forgetting that consumer cameras are only a small portion of the company) bc they sat on their hands for so long.

BUT THEN
They're doing fine.

File: IMG_0368.jpg (3.14 MB, 3616x3070)

3.14 MB JPG

>>4358784
Bzzzt bzzzt!
*misses focus*
*has apsc dr on every camera that might not miss focus*
*isnt a pancake after adding the filter threads and weather sealing - clear filter not included, you need it or the wr actually gets worse*
Imagine if snoy made the a7iv as bad as the a9iii for dr - and slower
Such is the z6iii
the autofocus on my g9ii is better than a z6ii…the dynamic range is better than a z6iii… and m43 has real pancakes!

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	3616
Image Height	3070
Scene Capture Type	Standard

File: pic_240910_01_02.jpg (940 KB, 1240x1860)

940 KB JPG

>>4358760
Pure artistic kino.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

>>4358789
I have to say, for all the "nikons can't focus" meming among internet tards, I've kept my original Z7 since it was new and I've shot the shit out of this thing. I've never had it miss focus on what I'm trying to hit. Are people just hipshooting at random or wtf? By the sound of it this camera should be completely impossible to use, but it's never given me a problem even once.

>>4358731
>Nikon really fucked up when they made f/1.8 the 'pro' model and f/1.4 the entry level model
It is an interesting strategy though. 1.4s didn't use to be this expensive and now the competition will have to adjust.

>>4358831
cameras made in the past ten years are all so good that their minor differences have to be hyperbolized to seem relevant at all

the price difference between the two isn't much and from what I've seen the f/1.8 is better quality images.
>>4358719
That's how I feel.

>>4358831
most "missed focus" is just retards shooting at to slow shutter speeds. of course your fucking toddler won't be sharp at 1/100s

hoping they continue this trend with a 24 or 28 f1.4 next
like the options of a solid pro capable f1.8, enthusiast / video oriented f1.4, and pro-pro f1.2
I wanted to get the 35 f1.4, but felt unnecessary given my other lenses, this 50 f1.4 seems more reasonable though

>>4358924
Every nikon Z lens is video oriented. All of nikon's top tier cameras except the fat fuji clone are video oriented, and even the fat fuji clone is mostly better video features for the z6ii's sensor. Nikon's updated autofocus was mostly for video and doesn't really beat anyone for demanding stills applications like football and birds doing stuff.

I'm going to be surprised if they don't start calling Z mount cinema lenses soon.

>>4358831
"Nikonpanasonicolympusfuji can't focus" 100% comes from people who have prior experience with sony FE and canon RF bodies. Compared to most entry level mirrorless, it's good, but a sony can manage a hit rate over 95% with a model with obscured eyes running towards the camera in a zig zag pattern and passing behind objects on the way there, and a nikon can not. Sports photography and super dynamic portraiture suffer. Nikon's early animal AF was also really, really, REALLY bad and more like leaf detect AF so most wildlife photographers are still sticking with their DSLR.

>>4358943
>Sports photography and super dynamic portraiture suffer
so shit nobody cares about got it

>>4358945
Those are the only genres that matter. Everything else may as well be ai slop on instagram now.

>>4358831
Try focusing on a squirrel in a tree with bricks 200' behind it.
Z6, Z7 all go WHOA THAT CONTRAST LET ME GET THEM BRICKS
Meanwhile the AF pin point is on the branch the squirrel is on, and not a single pixel of the AF point overly is off the branch.
Nikon AF is a joke.
Literally not even reliable in pinpoint BBAF mode.

Don't tell me to use muh animul baaaased AF or any of those gimmicks, all DSLRs could focus on a branch without deciding the building behind the tree outside your AF zone was what you needed to focus on.

>control ring instead or proper clicked aperture ring with markings and hard stops
This shit is so ass

>>4359178
Are all Nikon aperture rings like this? If its customisable its actually better.
Why would you need hard stops anyway for an aperture ring?

>>4359201
Most are customizable. Unclicked aperture rings suck though, unless you're doing video. With hard stops and clicks, you can easily control just by feel / muscle memory. Without, you really have to check the aperture setting and verify, possibly make further adjustment. Command dials usually have clicks so you and at least shift aperture by feel, but you still have visually check initially.

File: smug content.jpg (6 KB, 241x250)

6 KB JPG

>you need nothing faster than an F4, change my mind

>>4359441
>be my sense of righteous elitism
>indulge in $8000 worth of lenses
>end up shooting with the Z 85mm 1.8 90% of the time
>almost never go beyond f4 anyway
>fuck my face

>>4359463
Well if you insist

>>4359463
It is time to degearfag and sell off what you don't use, get 80% of the cost back, and enjoy the new life you have found for yourself.

>>4359463
Same but I've spent way more and I barely use my cameras at all.

Need a good pancake for Sony.

>>4359875
The sony pancake situation is about the same as the nikon pancake situation. Nikon just gamed their marketing materials by taking a standard part of lens design (internal focusing and having filter threads) and splitting it into a hood and protective filter to bring the claimed length down.

Sony 24mm/40mm G = 50mm long (WR)
Sony zeiss 35mm f2.8 = 37mm long (Incomplete WR)
Samyang 35mm f2.8 FE = 33mm long (Non WR)
Nikkor Z 26mm f2.8 with the mandatory lens hood and a NC filter to protect the focusing group = 33mm+1mm long, but now it's weather sealed, sorta.

>>4359891
It’s not mandatory at all. I took that shit off on day one and never out it back on. The fitted cap is so much faster and more convenient than a lens cap it just becomes automatic to pop it on & off automatically to protect it between shooting, and the front element is so fucking tiny you’d need to be a complete retard to hit it with anything. There is no need for a full-time protective filter on that lens. And the hood is so slim doesn’t do shit anyway so it’s pointless as well.

File: Viltrox-AF-28mm-f4.5-VCM-(...).jpg (183 KB, 1024x978)

183 KB JPG

>>4359441
>>4359875
>>you need nothing faster than an F4
>>Need a good pancake for Sony
Oh boy, do I have just the lens for you!

>>4358943
>football and birds doing stuf
just loser things... :^)

>>4359992
You don't think you're a loser?

>>4359463
e-p7 and 7artisans 35mm 1.2
thank me later

>>4358550
Asking the real questions.

>>4359995
muh """sports""" :^)

>>4360001
Plain to see then lol

>>4359441
>what is astrophotography

>>4358922
The worst part of mirrorless and the rise of IBIS is morons not understanding IBIS doesn't remove the need for appropriate shutter speeds.

>>4360031
But muh equivalence adjusted dynamic range accounting for ibis
*f4 1/3 iso 200* (actually f8 iso 800)
*blurry*
damn i need a panasonic leica noctitron now whats another $1000 anyways

File: lmao.png (3 KB, 312x53)

3 KB PNG

>>4358422
>Silent
Definitely not. There's a reason why Panasonic and Fuji are all moving to linear motors.

>>4360031
It's such a simple concept to understand yet I think you're right. I've absolutely seen more people shooting subjects that are, you know, moving, at speeds of like 1/80th and then wondering why they "missed focus". It's like they took the focal distance / shutter speed rule of thumb and haven't realised there are still reasons you go a faster shutter speed.
>>4360047
Doubly so, since the equiv f/ stop of something like 8.0 should mean MORE shit is in perfect focus, and yet somehow I see more retards blaming missed focus instead of looking at shutter speed.

>>4360031
You're acting like this wasn't a thing with IS lenses, that have been around before DSLRs were even a thing.

>>4359989
I don't trust Viltrox anymore. I've been waiting for their 135mm f1.8 for 18 months now. It was supposed to have come out last January.

File: HUH.jpg (14 KB, 559x423)

14 KB JPG

>>4359989
>F/4.5

>>4360289
Have you contacted them?

>>4358859
ehem
>pentax

>>4359989
4.5 is cringe

>>4359989
How the fuck is this not f/2.8?

>>4360484
Ask canon and nikon, who could not make an f2.8 pancake without external focusing. Nikon couldnt even figure out filter threads.

>>4358429
>he's not always shooting wide open even in broad daylight even if it takes an ND filter
lmaoing at your life

>>4358789
>pic
wtf you are so ugly bro?

>>4360484
>How the fuck is this not f/2.8?
Skill issue

mirrorless consoomers have been played like fools. there have been many hundreds of different 50mm f1.4 lenses ever made, some of which will have way better rendering and microcontrast than this 20 element monstrosity. they are selling you old optical designs but you now have to pay $500 AGAIN because they have uhhhh.... put it on a new mount.

>>4364674
>rendering and microcontrast
Show me where in the optics textbook this is defined and who measured it

>>4358554
A shiny grave with Muller on it, are you blind?

>>4360391
Best DSLR in the business, try harder kid

>>4364720
Pentax has a lot of problems. Real life problems, not DR chart problems, with their FF lens selection being rebranded price hiked tamrons or just actual garbage that is simultaneously giant and priced like the newest and best all-weather FF snoy mirrorless gear, so you might as well lose your precious weather sealing and use film era pentax lens, and their APS-C lenses are plagued with failing autofocus motors. Not the best body design either.

Also, pentax notoriously uses the same color science as old sony bodies. just something i've noticed. the k-1 and original a7r have the exact same color science and the aps-c dslrs look a lot like sony a6 series colors. The only way they can be differentiated is if you use the modern pentax lenses which have a stronger green cast, so the magenta poisoning to cope makes it look warmer than a sony a7r with a lens with neutral color.

>>4364755
>whoosh

>>4364767
No woosh. The D850 and D780 are still being made.

File: 124.jpg (326 KB, 1200x800)

326 KB JPG

>>4364755
>Pentax has a lot of problems
Don't care dweeb, works as good as a D850 and has more features too
Learn to edit